Man, Steve Jobs is a dork. He makes things shiny, acts like he's Jesus Christ Superstar and justifies a misplaced superior attitude to countless other dorks. The products his company makes are over-priced, over-hyped and over-rated junk.
Where is my pro-Apple bias supposed to come from? Outer space?
Can I cut up the inner workings of it, create a half a dozen different purpose made machines and stick my own user interface on it?
Lets see... I've personally built network firewalls, database and web server clusters, PVRs, MAME boxes and a couple of reduced functionality systems for my kid. I've built some devices out of parts from electronics stores.
Macs would have been unsuitable for any of these purposes. Which is why I use Debian or Ubuntu.
Aside from all of this, I'm reminded of my brother, studying at one of the most prestigious medical universities in the world using analog scientific instrumentation on a 386 because they don't have a copy of the source, so despite all their resources, they have no choice if they wish to use the superior analog gear instead of the modern digital gear which is markedly inferior.
As someone whose creates with the computer, rather than simply using the computer, I simply have no use for Macs at all. They are simple, and I am not.
Letting you install Windows or any other OS with Boot Camp is a prime example of how locked down Apple's machines are.
Which is something that was only achieved after they were defeated in the marketplace, discarded their hardware legacy, discarded their software legacy, stuck their tail between their legs, switched to using the hardware they had been competing with, switched to using software they did not originally conceive, and were forced to try to put a good foot forward after the dust settled, even as they position themselves right in the thick of the DRM debacle that is the modern IT ecosystem.
Yeah, they're just running out with open arms screaming "They can take our lives, but they can't take our freedom", aren't they? Tie that dead iPhone to the end of a rope and come join the fight.
You know, if we'd been buying Apples crap all this time instead of PCs, Linux never would have had a chance. Apple are much more ruthless about locking down their hardware and software than Microsoft ever were.
Windows has a monopoly on a software method of jury rigging a bunch of hardware from different manufacturers into something resembling a modern computer. Apple turns the computer into something more resembling a television.
Apple aren't better than Windows when it comes to freedom and monopoly. Far from it, MS has always been the lesser evil, that's why they succeeded in the marketplace. Apple is a bullet dodged that is currently ricocheting back.
Yes, infact I knew someone who use to fly those things and they weren't allowed to fully throttle up. He also said that during normal missions the plane would damage itself when going the faster speeds. Now of course this is all at someones word, so I have no written proof. Also there would be a slight correction, the SR-71 didn't have "normal" jet engines. SR-71 used ramjet engines, scramjets employ similar but much more advanced technology.
According to the article, when you try to increase the speeds to full throttle, the heat involved in slowing the air down for ramming becomes too much and the plane disintegrates. The achievement, if they can do it, will be to stablilize the scramjet with the air rushing through it at full speeds and not blow out the flames with Mach 5 winds.
Sounds like you have a general gripe that you've transplanted on this issue. You'd have to consider that the boomers would be more likely to want the plant to come back online, because presumably it'd be them that would benefit the most. And I guess it's completely impossible that knowledge and experience have any value here.
You're entirely correct. The knowledgeable and experienced people in charge of oversite have established that the plant remain closed for safety reasons, and the ignorant politicians are overriding. And there is no power to put a stop to these types of things from within the system, because this is how the system is MEANT to work. It has to be replaced.
This is a democracy. There is no "working" into position. The boomer demographic rules, and their concerns rule, and there is no democratic way to change it, because it is through democracy that it is enforced. Between capitalism and democracy, the young are truly and utterly fucked.
I was reading through an interesting site recently on something the author calls somafera. Don't know where the term came from, or if he coined it, but there's a pretty good breakdown of a number of warrior groups through history that attempted to evoke, sustain and function for extended periods in these mental states.
Your higher brain functions work to make your consciousness a seamless experience. Your lower brain functions, more concerned with survival, do not attempt to do this. Thus, when the body is in a fight or flight mode, time seems to speed up, slow down and become disjointed. This is how your primitive lower brain functions work, they don't care about making it seamless, they care about processing the data your senses are giving as close to real time as possible so you survive.
Now, play fair. If YouTube choose to supply their content using a format for which they have to pay some sort of royalty, that is their decision, which they will presumably take on a commercial basis. They are perfectly at liberty to supply their content in an alternative, legally unencumbered format -- such as Ogg -- if they wish. And yet they do not choose to do so. That tells us a lot.
The commercial decision was based on certain realities about the install base. The HTML5 spec would have set higher standards for what the browser is expected to provide in the way of base functionality to be considered a fully-functioning modern browser, and it would have been a trivial enterprise to add this already written and license free code into every browser. Nokia receive license fees as part of the MPEG-LA, therefore, it is in their interest to prevent this from happening so they can maintain leverage upon us.
There is no 'playing fair' here. This is about a cartel propping themselves up.
You could always hitchhike. I traveled over 10,000km in just such a fashion, and saw a lot more of life than any financially supported students on a fun little vacation does. It's pretty easy to walk into a new town and get enough cash work to feed yourself and move on if you own a pair of construction boots and aren't afraid of a little hard work.
Geez, it's a wonder multimedia-based services like YouTube even work on... just about every browser on the planet.
Every time you watch a video on YouTube with mp4 compression, they are obligated to pay Nokia and their fellow MPEG-LA members. The goal at W3C was to mandate that there should be support for a non-patent encumbered alternative for a browser to indicate that it is HTML5 compatible, so people will be able to publish without being compelled to pay on a per-download basis and feel confident that there would be support.
Nokia successfully overturned this effort, ensuring they continue to receive money from their patents.
Technical merit has nothing to do with this whatsoever. If you'd ever played around with Theora compression in question, you'd know very well that it's perfectly suitable for the task, and has the potential to open the playing field to anyone with an internet connection and a camera, whereas the mp4 alternatives are expensive enough that you are obligated to commercialize your use or you will not be able to operate under the MPEG-LA tax.
This is about control, plain and simple. That's why the MPEG-LA group exists.
They don't. If you have extra money, you give it to someone who will improve the world, and hopefully they will pay you back. If you don't like those terms, you deal with it, because those are the only terms we will help you enforce, and you can't enforce terms by yourself.
If you don't live this way, years pass, then one day a straw hits a camels back and you find ordinary people hanging moneylenders up in the streets. What do you think caused WWII?
Actually, I believe the ban is even stronger than that...things like banking and such are banned as well...basically we don't like Iran, so we can't do business with them at all.
That's ok. They're not allowed to bank with you anyways. They consider usury a sin.
Look him in the eyes with murderous intent, grind your teeth until the pain raises a frenzy in your mind, and tell him that you will personally see to hit that his name is mud and he never gets elected again, without giving a single word of details as to how you will do that. Snarl and shudder like you're just barely controlling yourself from knocking his fucking block off. Speak in a very precise way as you castigate him over the coals publicly for what he's doing and how badly he's fucking everyone there over. Do not swear or use foul language, but talk down to him as though you were a gentleman and he was a piece of dogshit you stepped in. Then stalk off as though you can no longer stand there and not hit him, without looking back.
Very effective at blowing holes in stuffed shirts. You don't do a damned thing wrong, but you make them very unsure of themselves and the power and respect they take so for granted, and you make everyone there embarrassed to be around them. People repeat it as "someone said this to him" without knowing who you are.
My mom doesn't know what MPEG2 compression is, but she still uses the DVD player I bought her.
What the fuck do I care about you mom?
See, it's not about what you think, is it? That's the lovely thing about these things, it's about what the audience thinks. And they appear to think you're a jackass. So I guess that means you lose.
When bandwidth is cheap and getting cheaper, expensive patent encumbered compression that you have to pay for by the download is dumb, even if it is better compression.
When they have their own means of making culture and producing value, what makes you think they're going to care about English? Maybe you should learn another language if you want to be able to work when they are the majority and you aren't. That time is coming faster than you think. You'll still be alive when it happens.
No, what I did was justify WHY compression has become irrelevant as bandwidth increases.
Your statement about resolution increasing is a red herring, particularly considering that the subject at hand is watching video on cell phones and web pages, and not high resolution displays. Hell, people don't even want that much resolution. Pimples start coming into focus and people are starting to notice that they don't like it.
The fact is, bandwidth is cheap and getting cheaper and fast and getting faster. When bandwidth was slow and expensive, compressing a movie by a large factor meant saving a significant bandwidth cost. It also meant the difference between delivering in a timely enough fashion or not doing so.
That is no longer the case.
With the added cost to compress, it is cheaper to use a free but inferior method of compression and let the high speed pipes make up for the lack.
Compression doesn't have an intrinsic value of its own. Ideally, you wouldn't use it at all, because it creates artifacts and increases CPU load on playback. Its only value comes from the time and money it saves you.
Ogg has a small bit of inertia as an audio format, which is good. The "best" you can do fighting that is to sow confusion in the market. What, are you trying to kill ogg? Every silly claim that "ogg is not a codec" is fuel for the competition, which you should note has a massive head start.
If the competition has a massive lead, why do they need to assert the merits of their product for inclusion in the W3C standard, rather than defending why it should have been the first choice? The fact that an alternative was put in is pretty strong evidence that their massive marketing lead amounts to nothing at all.
The article, and the discussion, and the whole shebang, are meant for professionals, not ignoramuses like you and the dude you're defending. The fact that you do or do not know what container or compression format we use to deliver websites to you means absolutely nothing at all. So, take your self important bullshit about "market awareness" and shove it up your ass. My mom doesn't know what MPEG2 compression is, but she still uses the DVD player I bought her. This is no different, and your collective ignorance is of no more consequence than hers.
Eww, no. XML sucks, it's full of bad compromises that come out of trying to be all things to all people, as you must get from a standards committee. All the best standards come from being used first, then openly standardised once experience has shown what should and should not go in the actual standard.
They did that. It was called SGML XML is what they openly standardized on once they had the experience
Which costs more to distribute, an mp4 stream or an ogg stream?
According to a news release from 2002 which is hosted on the MPEG LA site, the price for mp4 was:
2. In the case of Internet (wired and wireless) or mobile, annual royalties with annual limitations and thresholds will apply: (a) for the manufacture and sale of decoders and/or encoders: US $0.25 per activated decoder and/or encoder subject to an annual cap per legal entity of $1,000,000 for decoders and $1,000,000 for encoders (to be paid by the manufacturer that offers functioning product for sale or distribution, either directly or through a chain of distribution, to the end user), but there is no royalty for the first 50,000 decoders and first 50,000 encoders in a calendar year sold or distributed by a legal entity (applies to no more than one legal entity in an affiliated group); (b) for the use of decoders and encoders to decode or encode MPEG-4 video (to be paid by the party that is the apparent source of such video to the consumer), a licensee may choose to pay US $0.25 per subscriber per year or US $0.000333 per minute of MPEG-4 video used, each subject to an annual cap of $1,000,000 per legal entity, or a $1,000,000 annual paid-up fee (with no royalty reporting obligation), but no royalty is payable on the first 50,000 subscribers during a calendar year (applies to no more than one legal entity in an affiliated group). Subscriber refers to each unique viewer for any part of a year, but where the content provider's remuneration is not directly from subscriptions (e.g., advertiser-supported services), MPEG LA will work directly with Licensees to come up with a consistent method of counting subscribers that works with their business models.
3. In the case of Stored Video (packaged media and video transmitted and stored for viewing for which a transactional fee is paid), the replicator or content provider will pay (a) US $0.01 per 30 minutes or part to a maximum of US $0.04 per movie; (b) US $0.005 per 30 minutes or part thereof to a maximum of US $0.02 per movie where the content of the Stored Video is 5 years or older (after it was copyrighted or subject to be copyrighted), and (c) US $0.002 for a Stored Video of 12 minutes or less.
So, if the current terms even vaguely approach this older release, the difference in price/time sacrifice for the higher file size is more than offset by the pricing. Dollars and cents, free and open makes sense.
Slashdot Mirror
Man, Steve Jobs is a dork. He makes things shiny, acts like he's Jesus Christ Superstar and justifies a misplaced superior attitude to countless other dorks. The products his company makes are over-priced, over-hyped and over-rated junk.
Where is my pro-Apple bias supposed to come from? Outer space?
Can I cut up the inner workings of it, create a half a dozen different purpose made machines and stick my own user interface on it?
Lets see... I've personally built network firewalls, database and web server clusters, PVRs, MAME boxes and a couple of reduced functionality systems for my kid. I've built some devices out of parts from electronics stores.
Macs would have been unsuitable for any of these purposes. Which is why I use Debian or Ubuntu.
Aside from all of this, I'm reminded of my brother, studying at one of the most prestigious medical universities in the world using analog scientific instrumentation on a 386 because they don't have a copy of the source, so despite all their resources, they have no choice if they wish to use the superior analog gear instead of the modern digital gear which is markedly inferior.
As someone whose creates with the computer, rather than simply using the computer, I simply have no use for Macs at all. They are simple, and I am not.
Letting you install Windows or any other OS with Boot Camp is a prime example of how locked down Apple's machines are.
Which is something that was only achieved after they were defeated in the marketplace, discarded their hardware legacy, discarded their software legacy, stuck their tail between their legs, switched to using the hardware they had been competing with, switched to using software they did not originally conceive, and were forced to try to put a good foot forward after the dust settled, even as they position themselves right in the thick of the DRM debacle that is the modern IT ecosystem.
Yeah, they're just running out with open arms screaming "They can take our lives, but they can't take our freedom", aren't they? Tie that dead iPhone to the end of a rope and come join the fight.
What a joke.
You know, if we'd been buying Apples crap all this time instead of PCs, Linux never would have had a chance. Apple are much more ruthless about locking down their hardware and software than Microsoft ever were.
Windows has a monopoly on a software method of jury rigging a bunch of hardware from different manufacturers into something resembling a modern computer. Apple turns the computer into something more resembling a television.
Apple aren't better than Windows when it comes to freedom and monopoly. Far from it, MS has always been the lesser evil, that's why they succeeded in the marketplace. Apple is a bullet dodged that is currently ricocheting back.
Yes, infact I knew someone who use to fly those things and they weren't allowed to fully throttle up. He also said that during normal missions the plane would damage itself when going the faster speeds. Now of course this is all at someones word, so I have no written proof. Also there would be a slight correction, the SR-71 didn't have "normal" jet engines. SR-71 used ramjet engines, scramjets employ similar but much more advanced technology.
According to the article, when you try to increase the speeds to full throttle, the heat involved in slowing the air down for ramming becomes too much and the plane disintegrates. The achievement, if they can do it, will be to stablilize the scramjet with the air rushing through it at full speeds and not blow out the flames with Mach 5 winds.
Sounds like you have a general gripe that you've transplanted on this issue. You'd have to consider that the boomers would be more likely to want the plant to come back online, because presumably it'd be them that would benefit the most. And I guess it's completely impossible that knowledge and experience have any value here.
You're entirely correct. The knowledgeable and experienced people in charge of oversite have established that the plant remain closed for safety reasons, and the ignorant politicians are overriding. And there is no power to put a stop to these types of things from within the system, because this is how the system is MEANT to work. It has to be replaced.
This is a democracy. There is no "working" into position. The boomer demographic rules, and their concerns rule, and there is no democratic way to change it, because it is through democracy that it is enforced. Between capitalism and democracy, the young are truly and utterly fucked.
This isn't business taking priority to safety. This is the old demographic overruling the young demographic.
I was reading through an interesting site recently on something the author calls somafera. Don't know where the term came from, or if he coined it, but there's a pretty good breakdown of a number of warrior groups through history that attempted to evoke, sustain and function for extended periods in these mental states.
Your higher brain functions work to make your consciousness a seamless experience. Your lower brain functions, more concerned with survival, do not attempt to do this. Thus, when the body is in a fight or flight mode, time seems to speed up, slow down and become disjointed. This is how your primitive lower brain functions work, they don't care about making it seamless, they care about processing the data your senses are giving as close to real time as possible so you survive.
Now, play fair. If YouTube choose to supply their content using a format for which they have to pay some sort of royalty, that is their decision, which they will presumably take on a commercial basis. They are perfectly at liberty to supply their content in an alternative, legally unencumbered format -- such as Ogg -- if they wish. And yet they do not choose to do so. That tells us a lot.
The commercial decision was based on certain realities about the install base. The HTML5 spec would have set higher standards for what the browser is expected to provide in the way of base functionality to be considered a fully-functioning modern browser, and it would have been a trivial enterprise to add this already written and license free code into every browser. Nokia receive license fees as part of the MPEG-LA, therefore, it is in their interest to prevent this from happening so they can maintain leverage upon us.
There is no 'playing fair' here. This is about a cartel propping themselves up.
You could always hitchhike. I traveled over 10,000km in just such a fashion, and saw a lot more of life than any financially supported students on a fun little vacation does. It's pretty easy to walk into a new town and get enough cash work to feed yourself and move on if you own a pair of construction boots and aren't afraid of a little hard work.
Geez, it's a wonder multimedia-based services like YouTube even work on... just about every browser on the planet.
Every time you watch a video on YouTube with mp4 compression, they are obligated to pay Nokia and their fellow MPEG-LA members. The goal at W3C was to mandate that there should be support for a non-patent encumbered alternative for a browser to indicate that it is HTML5 compatible, so people will be able to publish without being compelled to pay on a per-download basis and feel confident that there would be support.
Nokia successfully overturned this effort, ensuring they continue to receive money from their patents.
Technical merit has nothing to do with this whatsoever. If you'd ever played around with Theora compression in question, you'd know very well that it's perfectly suitable for the task, and has the potential to open the playing field to anyone with an internet connection and a camera, whereas the mp4 alternatives are expensive enough that you are obligated to commercialize your use or you will not be able to operate under the MPEG-LA tax.
This is about control, plain and simple. That's why the MPEG-LA group exists.
They don't. If you have extra money, you give it to someone who will improve the world, and hopefully they will pay you back. If you don't like those terms, you deal with it, because those are the only terms we will help you enforce, and you can't enforce terms by yourself.
If you don't live this way, years pass, then one day a straw hits a camels back and you find ordinary people hanging moneylenders up in the streets. What do you think caused WWII?
Actually, I believe the ban is even stronger than that...things like banking and such are banned as well...basically we don't like Iran, so we can't do business with them at all.
That's ok. They're not allowed to bank with you anyways. They consider usury a sin.
Clue: Bandwidth on mobile devices is not cheap because Nokia and their peers fix the rates using tactics like this.
Look him in the eyes with murderous intent, grind your teeth until the pain raises a frenzy in your mind, and tell him that you will personally see to hit that his name is mud and he never gets elected again, without giving a single word of details as to how you will do that. Snarl and shudder like you're just barely controlling yourself from knocking his fucking block off. Speak in a very precise way as you castigate him over the coals publicly for what he's doing and how badly he's fucking everyone there over. Do not swear or use foul language, but talk down to him as though you were a gentleman and he was a piece of dogshit you stepped in. Then stalk off as though you can no longer stand there and not hit him, without looking back.
Very effective at blowing holes in stuffed shirts. You don't do a damned thing wrong, but you make them very unsure of themselves and the power and respect they take so for granted, and you make everyone there embarrassed to be around them. People repeat it as "someone said this to him" without knowing who you are.
My mom doesn't know what MPEG2 compression is, but she still uses the DVD player I bought her.
What the fuck do I care about you mom?
See, it's not about what you think, is it? That's the lovely thing about these things, it's about what the audience thinks. And they appear to think you're a jackass. So I guess that means you lose.
You work for Nokia or something?
When bandwidth is cheap and getting cheaper, expensive patent encumbered compression that you have to pay for by the download is dumb, even if it is better compression.
Is that straightforward enough?
When they have their own means of making culture and producing value, what makes you think they're going to care about English? Maybe you should learn another language if you want to be able to work when they are the majority and you aren't. That time is coming faster than you think. You'll still be alive when it happens.
No, what I did was justify WHY compression has become irrelevant as bandwidth increases.
Your statement about resolution increasing is a red herring, particularly considering that the subject at hand is watching video on cell phones and web pages, and not high resolution displays. Hell, people don't even want that much resolution. Pimples start coming into focus and people are starting to notice that they don't like it.
The fact is, bandwidth is cheap and getting cheaper and fast and getting faster. When bandwidth was slow and expensive, compressing a movie by a large factor meant saving a significant bandwidth cost. It also meant the difference between delivering in a timely enough fashion or not doing so.
That is no longer the case.
With the added cost to compress, it is cheaper to use a free but inferior method of compression and let the high speed pipes make up for the lack.
Compression doesn't have an intrinsic value of its own. Ideally, you wouldn't use it at all, because it creates artifacts and increases CPU load on playback. Its only value comes from the time and money it saves you.
Ogg has a small bit of inertia as an audio format, which is good. The "best" you can do fighting that is to sow confusion in the market. What, are you trying to kill ogg? Every silly claim that "ogg is not a codec" is fuel for the competition, which you should note has a massive head start.
If the competition has a massive lead, why do they need to assert the merits of their product for inclusion in the W3C standard, rather than defending why it should have been the first choice? The fact that an alternative was put in is pretty strong evidence that their massive marketing lead amounts to nothing at all.
The article, and the discussion, and the whole shebang, are meant for professionals, not ignoramuses like you and the dude you're defending. The fact that you do or do not know what container or compression format we use to deliver websites to you means absolutely nothing at all. So, take your self important bullshit about "market awareness" and shove it up your ass. My mom doesn't know what MPEG2 compression is, but she still uses the DVD player I bought her. This is no different, and your collective ignorance is of no more consequence than hers.
Eww, no. XML sucks, it's full of bad compromises that come out of trying to be all things to all people, as you must get from a standards committee. All the best standards come from being used first, then openly standardised once experience has shown what should and should not go in the actual standard.
They did that. It was called SGML XML is what they openly standardized on once they had the experience
Which costs more to distribute, an mp4 stream or an ogg stream?
According to a news release from 2002 which is hosted on the MPEG LA site, the price for mp4 was:
2. In the case of Internet (wired and wireless) or mobile, annual royalties with annual limitations and thresholds will apply: (a) for the manufacture and sale of decoders and/or encoders: US $0.25 per activated decoder and/or encoder subject to an annual cap per legal entity of $1,000,000 for decoders and $1,000,000 for encoders (to be paid by the manufacturer that offers functioning product for sale or distribution, either directly or through a chain of distribution, to the end user), but there is no royalty for the first 50,000 decoders and first 50,000 encoders in a calendar year sold or distributed by a legal entity (applies to no more than one legal entity in an affiliated group); (b) for the use of decoders and encoders to decode or encode MPEG-4 video (to be paid by the party that is the apparent source of such video to the consumer), a licensee may choose to pay US $0.25 per subscriber per year or US $0.000333 per minute of MPEG-4 video used, each subject to an annual cap of $1,000,000 per legal entity, or a $1,000,000 annual paid-up fee (with no royalty reporting obligation), but no royalty is payable on the first 50,000 subscribers during a calendar year (applies to no more than one legal entity in an affiliated group). Subscriber refers to each unique viewer for any part of a year, but where the content provider's remuneration is not directly from subscriptions (e.g., advertiser-supported services), MPEG LA will work directly with Licensees to come up with a consistent method of counting subscribers that works with their business models.
3. In the case of Stored Video (packaged media and video transmitted and stored for viewing for which a transactional fee is paid), the replicator or content provider will pay (a) US $0.01 per 30 minutes or part to a maximum of US $0.04 per movie; (b) US $0.005 per 30 minutes or part thereof to a maximum of US $0.02 per movie where the content of the Stored Video is 5 years or older (after it was copyrighted or subject to be copyrighted), and (c) US $0.002 for a Stored Video of 12 minutes or less.
So, if the current terms even vaguely approach this older release, the difference in price/time sacrifice for the higher file size is more than offset by the pricing. Dollars and cents, free and open makes sense.
Anyone got current/more accurate pricing info?