CD preserves dynamics, it's the mastering that crushes them out
That's exactly what i was saying. CDs would preserve dynamics perfectly, because the peaks don't suffer from distortion as long as they don't clip. Sadly, this can be (and is, thanks to the loudness war) abused through compressing everything to peak level. So, in the end result, the CD is the medium without dynamics, ironically _because_ it is technically superior for dynamics. I never claimed that vinyl was technically better for high dynamic range content (it is absolutely not). Maybe that could be the true raison d'être for DVD-like multichannel media: forget surround sound, here comes "differently mastered digital", offering different tracks on one medium, a choice between radio style compression (for the car), regular compression (for casual listening), hifi compression (for focused listening on an average stereo) and HDR track (for those who want to see behind the engineers/want to annoy their neighbors with the kettledrum). But those people who just want to believe that digital is evil will be the bigger market, so this is unlikely to happen.
Vinyl can be highly compressed yet not mastered with excessively high signal strength. It wouldn't make sense to do
Also what i was saying, you could do it (put the signal from a flatcompressed CD on vinyl at a gain level where vinyl is not causing any trouble) but no good mastering engineer would not do it (not even a slightly sub-average one), because the result would would be much worse (even in terms of loudness and distortion) than what you would get with vinyl specific, less compressed processing. It's a lesson many aspiring electronic musicians from the digital age have learned the painful way, through naively having a CD style signal pressed.
it does not prevent it, but it does discourage it. probably because an overcompression sounds even worse on vinyl, because the dynamic range is not a hard wall like on a CD (the limits of signed int16) but a soft one: the higher the level, the more likely you are to get all kinds of player-dependent distortion. at the same felt loudness making everything flat to a certain limit would likely sound worse than keeping some dynamics in the signal and have the peaks reach somewhat into the red zone while keeping the lower parts in the green.
the CD gets a perfect signal right until the brick wall, while the vinyl does not, result: high dynamics sound better on CD.
introduce loudness war: mastering engineers are tempted by the perfect representation of CD at max level, they remove all dynamics by compressing everything to max level. result: flat, dull sound on CD. vinyl stays imperfect in its representation of dynamics, but unlike CD it at least keeps any dynamics to represent.
All the quick reviews i've seen so far suggest that this new GT card does not make less but more noise than the GTS cards. This is not so surprising since the GT cards all have a single slot cooler, with a very small fan at the side, while the GTS vent their (surely higher) waste heat with a highly praised double slot cooler that is supposed to be as silent as any aftermarket cooler you could buy.
Does Spore count? That's seems to be rising higher on the "Lionhead scale" every day. Might well end up being to civilization style games what fable was to action RPGs.
still, the current transrapid design is built to climb up to 10% as opposed to the 3.5% of the TGV, and could in theory climb much more, while conventional trains are scratching the limits of wheel-rail traction. but the real problem is reaching those 10%, while a conventional train car "touches" the rails at only two points, a transrapid segment "touches" the rail over the complete length, which means that both horizontal and vertical curvature is limited by the margin between minimal and maximal distance between car and track magnets.
i guess a redesign that focuses a little more on playing out potential advantages in line rounting compared to conventional trains instead of only focusing on top speed (which is not really attractive > 400 kph because of unavoidable air friction and air noise) could be a really worthwhile investment, but sadly this will never happen since "better line routing possibilities" lacks any "sexy".
maglev is only more expensive than a conventional track if the conventional track does not need a tunnel while the maglev does not thanks to not having to rely on inherently low wheel-on-track friction, enabling maglev to be able to easily climb mountains that a conventional train could not dream of climbing. the TGV partially overcomes this problem with relying on inertia to climb some small mountains (legends go that there are places in the network, where the TGV could not get out of if stopped for an emergency), but the dedicated TGV tracks that really allow high speeds are probably still expensive enough. conventional is all fine and great if you have more or less flat terrain and travel long legs (shitty acceleration, though often enough acceleration is not technically limited but because of noise, no advantage for maglev here), but in difficult terrain - of which flat munich is certainly as bad an example as possible - maglev could really shine.
wrong. wheel-on-track is limited by friction, no matter how powerful your engine is, you can't accelerate faster than what the friction (which is low) allows. with a system like the transrapid the magnetic connection between track and car _is_ the engine itself, if the coils and power supply were laid out for maximal acceleration this system could do multiple Gs of acceleration since there is no additional limit other than the power of the engine itself.
the actual train is probably laid out for an accelleration that won't throw passengers used to the slow acceleration of trains off their feet so the advantage over conventional trains is not as huge as it could be, but the higher acceleration is still one of the main advantages (if not _the_ main advantage) over conventional trains.
i used to be very fascinated by this idea of a "self-evacuating-low-pressure-train" like this, but just now i am wondering, would that really give an advantage or would it rather be so that the drag from the pressure difference between front side (>= atmosphere pressure) and back side (lower, depending on how much the train is modelled to work like a piston) of the trains evens out with the advantage? i don't think one could really judge this without some serious calculations.
if it did, though it could be really an amazing system, because without the imperative to build streamlined you could put the people in ball shaped cells that could not only tilt to even out sideways acceleration in curves (some trains do that to allow faster speed in curves, not to make the train not fall from the tracks - some tilting trains even shift the center of mass to the outer side of the curve - but to make the passengers not fall from their seats) but also angle forward/backward to allow maximal, still more or less comfortable accelleration/decelleration. note that (very much unlike with wheel-on-track) accelleration/decelleration is practically unlimited with transrapid-style maglev, including regenerative braking. this, btw, is the reason why the perfect application for the transrapid technology would be an alpine connection, transrapid maglev could easily go up and down all the mountains while conventional tracks need all those very expensive tunnels, making maglev the cheaper thing to build there.
one more idea to strengthen the one-way-valve thing: the one-way-valves could not only go to atmosphere pressure but to intermediate air tanks that would be evacuated to some easily achievable intermediate pressure. this could be rather cheap since the reliability for these pumps would not have to be very big, they could even be useful if they run in a "best effort" manner on unreliable local renewable electricity like wind or solar: better vacuum in the tube if available, but not that much loss if the intermediate tank is not evacuated for a while, the one-way valve will stay quite and the quality of the vacuum in the tube will only slowly degrade. also, the pumps could easily be maintained/replaced, thanks to the valve, and every engineer knows how much cheaper parts that are allowed to gracefully fail can be compared to parts that are absolutely mission critical (like, for example, _anything_ on an airplane).
note that in this case the babelfish translation is actually a perfect translation: the german (bavarian?) original was at least as confused as this babelfish version
there isn't much left, unless you count the lesser flash ipods as well. in the luggable-hdd-that-can-play-music market there is no affordable competition anymore. the cowon and creative options are as expensive as the 160 gb ipod at less than half the capacity.
Anybody who takes C++ as an all-purpose language would see Java and C# as potential replacements for most of what he thinks C++ is for.
Of course, more reasonable people would restrict the application of C++ only to areas where Java and C# fail (low level systems programming) and see no overlap. So the sick mind is not the one who overestimates Java or C#, but the one who overestimates C++. There are still way too many of those.
As always, people will happily vote for the party whose Incredible Taxation Change Miracle promises to create the biggest net win for everybody, out of some deliberate calculation error deeply hidden within the dungeons of an overclomplex taxation system (parts of the insurance system included).
> But the relevant fact is that the "purpose" of the tool must be hacking.
Fine, then bury the old unix mentality "one tool for one problem", add a picture viewer to your botnet-installer-rootkit-worm. Or an IM client to your DRM breaker, if you are more concerned with the original than with this new german DMCA++ clone. It's never as easy as you would like it to be.
Sadly, it doesn't work like that: it's easy, even for politicians, to see a connection between designing bullet proof vests and testing prototypes with guns. The same i snot true with network security issues, politicians in charge of thse things have been known to not even understand the term "we browser", they probably just click on "their internets", or have an equally clueless staff person do it for them. "So there are these evilthings and they are a problem. I think we should ban all evilthings, then the problem will go away."
> #1. The registry. It's too fucking brittle AND it is constantly open by Windows AND it is not > automatically replicated X times over Y days so you can recover when it does break.
Google ERUNT. But you are absolutely right if you ask "WHY DID SOMETHING LIKE THIS NOT COME WITH THE SYSTEM???"
was your american cable also in (an obviously rather backwater part of) a state run by one party for half a century? just making sure you are not comparing an urban area with some village in the woods...
in your libertarian dreamland, money would concentrate in dimensions unthinkable even today. with blowing up competitor's factories or without. eventually enough monetary power has concentrated to completely customize legal structures to the needs of those power concentrations. viola, feudalism, even without a little intermission of "anarchy for the masses".
Slashdot Mirror
that only proves that it's another blizzard game that does not really start before you have hit the level cap through much grinding.
CD preserves dynamics, it's the mastering that crushes them out
That's exactly what i was saying. CDs would preserve dynamics perfectly, because the peaks don't suffer from distortion as long as they don't clip. Sadly, this can be (and is, thanks to the loudness war) abused through compressing everything to peak level. So, in the end result, the CD is the medium without dynamics, ironically _because_ it is technically superior for dynamics. I never claimed that vinyl was technically better for high dynamic range content (it is absolutely not). Maybe that could be the true raison d'être for DVD-like multichannel media: forget surround sound, here comes "differently mastered digital", offering different tracks on one medium, a choice between radio style compression (for the car), regular compression (for casual listening), hifi compression (for focused listening on an average stereo) and HDR track (for those who want to see behind the engineers/want to annoy their neighbors with the kettledrum). But those people who just want to believe that digital is evil will be the bigger market, so this is unlikely to happen.
Vinyl can be highly compressed yet not mastered with excessively high signal strength. It wouldn't make sense to do
Also what i was saying, you could do it (put the signal from a flatcompressed CD on vinyl at a gain level where vinyl is not causing any trouble) but no good mastering engineer would not do it (not even a slightly sub-average one), because the result would would be much worse (even in terms of loudness and distortion) than what you would get with vinyl specific, less compressed processing. It's a lesson many aspiring electronic musicians from the digital age have learned the painful way, through naively having a CD style signal pressed.
it does not prevent it, but it does discourage it. probably because an overcompression sounds even worse on vinyl, because the dynamic range is not a hard wall like on a CD (the limits of signed int16) but a soft one: the higher the level, the more likely you are to get all kinds of player-dependent distortion. at the same felt loudness making everything flat to a certain limit would likely sound worse than keeping some dynamics in the signal and have the peaks reach somewhat into the red zone while keeping the lower parts in the green.
the CD gets a perfect signal right until the brick wall, while the vinyl does not, result: high dynamics sound better on CD.
introduce loudness war: mastering engineers are tempted by the perfect representation of CD at max level, they remove all dynamics by compressing everything to max level. result: flat, dull sound on CD. vinyl stays imperfect in its representation of dynamics, but unlike CD it at least keeps any dynamics to represent.
All the quick reviews i've seen so far suggest that this new GT card does not make less but more noise than the GTS cards. This is not so surprising since the GT cards all have a single slot cooler, with a very small fan at the side, while the GTS vent their (surely higher) waste heat with a highly praised double slot cooler that is supposed to be as silent as any aftermarket cooler you could buy.
i've heard there's a multiplayer tower-defense flash game in the making somewhere, guess this could maybe used on a console as well? ;)
should be easy enough to keep a copy at console patch level as long as they don't add in some steam-like annoyances.
still, the current transrapid design is built to climb up to 10% as opposed to the 3.5% of the TGV, and could in theory climb much more, while conventional trains are scratching the limits of wheel-rail traction. but the real problem is reaching those 10%, while a conventional train car "touches" the rails at only two points, a transrapid segment "touches" the rail over the complete length, which means that both horizontal and vertical curvature is limited by the margin between minimal and maximal distance between car and track magnets.
i guess a redesign that focuses a little more on playing out potential advantages in line rounting compared to conventional trains instead of only focusing on top speed (which is not really attractive > 400 kph because of unavoidable air friction and air noise) could be a really worthwhile investment, but sadly this will never happen since "better line routing possibilities" lacks any "sexy".
whiter than that. it's enough to consider that munich is home to the headquarters of siemens...
maglev is only more expensive than a conventional track if the conventional track does not need a tunnel while the maglev does not thanks to not having to rely on inherently low wheel-on-track friction, enabling maglev to be able to easily climb mountains that a conventional train could not dream of climbing. the TGV partially overcomes this problem with relying on inertia to climb some small mountains (legends go that there are places in the network, where the TGV could not get out of if stopped for an emergency), but the dedicated TGV tracks that really allow high speeds are probably still expensive enough. conventional is all fine and great if you have more or less flat terrain and travel long legs (shitty acceleration, though often enough acceleration is not technically limited but because of noise, no advantage for maglev here), but in difficult terrain - of which flat munich is certainly as bad an example as possible - maglev could really shine.
wrong. wheel-on-track is limited by friction, no matter how powerful your engine is, you can't accelerate faster than what the friction (which is low) allows. with a system like the transrapid the magnetic connection between track and car _is_ the engine itself, if the coils and power supply were laid out for maximal acceleration this system could do multiple Gs of acceleration since there is no additional limit other than the power of the engine itself.
the actual train is probably laid out for an accelleration that won't throw passengers used to the slow acceleration of trains off their feet so the advantage over conventional trains is not as huge as it could be, but the higher acceleration is still one of the main advantages (if not _the_ main advantage) over conventional trains.
i used to be very fascinated by this idea of a "self-evacuating-low-pressure-train" like this, but just now i am wondering, would that really give an advantage or would it rather be so that the drag from the pressure difference between front side (>= atmosphere pressure) and back side (lower, depending on how much the train is modelled to work like a piston) of the trains evens out with the advantage? i don't think one could really judge this without some serious calculations.
if it did, though it could be really an amazing system, because without the imperative to build streamlined you could put the people in ball shaped cells that could not only tilt to even out sideways acceleration in curves (some trains do that to allow faster speed in curves, not to make the train not fall from the tracks - some tilting trains even shift the center of mass to the outer side of the curve - but to make the passengers not fall from their seats) but also angle forward/backward to allow maximal, still more or less comfortable accelleration/decelleration. note that (very much unlike with wheel-on-track) accelleration/decelleration is practically unlimited with transrapid-style maglev, including regenerative braking. this, btw, is the reason why the perfect application for the transrapid technology would be an alpine connection, transrapid maglev could easily go up and down all the mountains while conventional tracks need all those very expensive tunnels, making maglev the cheaper thing to build there.
one more idea to strengthen the one-way-valve thing: the one-way-valves could not only go to atmosphere pressure but to intermediate air tanks that would be evacuated to some easily achievable intermediate pressure. this could be rather cheap since the reliability for these pumps would not have to be very big, they could even be useful if they run in a "best effort" manner on unreliable local renewable electricity like wind or solar: better vacuum in the tube if available, but not that much loss if the intermediate tank is not evacuated for a while, the one-way valve will stay quite and the quality of the vacuum in the tube will only slowly degrade. also, the pumps could easily be maintained/replaced, thanks to the valve, and every engineer knows how much cheaper parts that are allowed to gracefully fail can be compared to parts that are absolutely mission critical (like, for example, _anything_ on an airplane).
note that in this case the babelfish translation is actually a perfect translation: the german (bavarian?) original was at least as confused as this babelfish version
there isn't much left, unless you count the lesser flash ipods as well. in the luggable-hdd-that-can-play-music market there is no affordable competition anymore. the cowon and creative options are as expensive as the 160 gb ipod at less than half the capacity.
reminds me of barbara brockhaus
i'm just wondering how foaf can still not be in the "tagging beta" thing of this "exciting news item"...
Anybody who takes C++ as an all-purpose language would see Java and C# as potential replacements for most of what he thinks C++ is for.
Of course, more reasonable people would restrict the application of C++ only to areas where Java and C# fail (low level systems programming) and see no overlap. So the sick mind is not the one who overestimates Java or C#, but the one who overestimates C++. There are still way too many of those.
> Next elections will be very interesting.
:(
You're an optimist
As always, people will happily vote for the party whose Incredible Taxation Change Miracle promises to create the biggest net win for everybody, out of some deliberate calculation error deeply hidden within the dungeons of an overclomplex taxation system (parts of the insurance system included).
> But the relevant fact is that the "purpose" of the tool must be hacking.
Fine, then bury the old unix mentality "one tool for one problem", add a picture viewer to your botnet-installer-rootkit-worm. Or an IM client to your DRM breaker, if you are more concerned with the original than with this new german DMCA++ clone. It's never as easy as you would like it to be.
Sadly, it doesn't work like that: it's easy, even for politicians, to see a connection between designing bullet proof vests and testing prototypes with guns. The same i snot true with network security issues, politicians in charge of thse things have been known to not even understand the term "we browser", they probably just click on "their internets", or have an equally clueless staff person do it for them. "So there are these evilthings and they are a problem. I think we should ban all evilthings, then the problem will go away."
> #1. The registry. It's too fucking brittle AND it is constantly open by Windows AND it is not
> automatically replicated X times over Y days so you can recover when it does break.
Google ERUNT. But you are absolutely right if you ask "WHY DID SOMETHING LIKE THIS NOT COME WITH THE SYSTEM???"
what about "all documents except those completely unrelated to your plans of taking over the country"?
what country are you living in, that letting down your pants is a "patriotic duty"?
:)
ok, you totally got me there, didn't see the irony until the float-on-water thing
was your american cable also in (an obviously rather backwater part of) a state run by one party for half a century? just making sure you are not comparing an urban area with some village in the woods...
in your libertarian dreamland, money would concentrate in dimensions unthinkable even today. with blowing up competitor's factories or without. eventually enough monetary power has concentrated to completely customize legal structures to the needs of those power concentrations. viola, feudalism, even without a little intermission of "anarchy for the masses".