The benefit is that a louder signal is perceived as a better signal by the ear. Since our sensitivity is not equally distributed along all frequencies a louder signal "acquires" more frequency range.
Of course that is a lower fidelity signal because high fidelity means reconstructing also the dynamics of the original sound, so to audiophiles a compressed signal sounds crappy.
I think the war started with sound engineers overcompressing stuff out of experimentation (in dance music compression is an important aspect, for instance). That made louder records stand out better in radio programming (even if radio stations have good compressors themselves nowadays) and casual listening, especially on crappy audio equipment.
Once the ear has adjusted itself to the loud recording, the less loud one sounds a little worse.
> Linus' comments on Debian seem old. Calling Debian (and especially Ubuntu) "technical" in nature doesn't jive.
This is not the first time he's trolling:)
Well he did not call ubuntu technical, he called debian technical. Nevermind that in my recent experience debian installs are almost as painless as ubuntu ones.
In my experience, debian works beautifully on G2 and G4 hardware too but maybe he's had issues with his G5.
I did not say China never had culture. I say that most chinese now are aiming at western lifestyle, no matter what, because it's (incorrectly?) perceived as freedom. It's the same process, but more radical, that happened in the bastardization of western countries culture to the american one.
The military people know, for example, that adventures like the invasion of Iraq only serve to fuel terrorism and make everything a hundred times worse. That's simple common sense. But since the propaganda machinery and the politicians lack all common sense...
It's quite right that the way USA dealt with Iraq and terror suspects just creates more problems.
I don't subscribe to the assertion that politicians do it for stupidity.
IMHO Bush has powerful support that go beyond the two party system. Else he'd not have survived the questionable elections and 9/11's disturbing questions about bush and osama ex business relations.
Politicians are stupid because they are puppets, somewhere behind them there is people who wants this outcome: to be very paranoid i'd say USA has expired its role as young culture-less country because it has developed a kind of culture. So it's time for chinese and eastern people, the new young and culture-less (thanks to communism) countries.
Besides, the guy in some position at Microsoft can say "we provided no financial incentives to paramount or dreamworks" without lying, while Microsoft could be behind it all nonetheless.
Replacing the internet is not possible. Either everybody switches overnight, or there is a period where these new networking tech/protocols must communicate with the old ones. So they essentially become part of the internet, nevermind it won't share the TCP/IP stack. Besides, a compatibility layer is needed for existing internet apps.
This is totally redundant, and there's no reason to do it - just like other companies writing operating systems when Windows Vista was being developed...
Wait, bad example...
Of course it is. You called Vista an operating system.
Operating systems make computers work, vista makes Gates rich.
It's sure easier to wire up South Korea than the USA. Anyway there are a couple points: US have quite more resources to devote to internet access, and the topic here was not the coverage but the service quality. So the ratio resources/territory is not as dramatically different than your comment seem to portray.
Another possible factor: ISPs that are also cable/telephone companies may not like their subscribers to save money using VoIP and internet TV.
even without cosidering ODF as proof, the alternative to "itsatrap" is: "Microsoft wants to give the world a free open and interoperable standard that makes it trivial for MS user base to migrate to alternative implementations".
I'd rather believe "Osama Bin Laden wants to become a nun".
I'm always admiring Microsoft-land, where accessing probably cached html pages requires acquiring a lock on db resources in a transaction. Oops shouldn't have dare spoken, it's probably a patented process.
The non-discriminatory part is not really enforceable IMHO. As I said in another comment, if the patent holder is a front for a big company (easy, in these days of multinational, electronic, anonymous money) the license can just be a little high to hurt the competition of the big company.
That might be catched by making the big company pay up for the difference in wealth from the old owner, but something a little more subtle may just work fine, like acting like a proxy. If a small frontend for a big company asks for high fees to license a patent, the big company can pay up no problems as it's a transfer of funds from one branch to the other. The competition has to pay an inflated price. Or doing something similar, like the way SCO made a big favour to M$ bluffing big time about linux.
> A lot of it probably has its roots with Christianity.
John taylor Gatto says quite the opposite: the industrial society, son of illuminism and industrial revolution, transformed culture in schooling. He probably is not attacking ideologically the industrial revolution, anyway, so neither am I.
I see a problem when you capitalize Christianity. We might go to the source as well:
Matthew 10:16 I am sending you out like sheep among wolves. Therefore be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves.
Being shrewd implies intelligence. Sharp intelligence, according to the dictionary, even. And how does Jesus address people he doesn't like? "Bad"? hmmm, very often he says, "hypocrite", underlining the lack of applying principles to behavior, which is a matter not only of good heart but also intelligence.
(note: of course now you may be trying to recall where indeed reason is attacked. But those passages IMO don't criticize reason per se, but its use outside its scope, applying reason to the domain of a transcendent god. Stupid example: a transcendent god and the concept of "being one" are incompatible. Strictly speaking a possible aspect of a god that is transcendent can't be considered "one" "two" "many" because there is no whatsoever guarantee that the concept has any meaning outside our dimension.
So I have troubles making the consideration about Christianity applicable to schooling.
You might mean religious men were lethal obstacles for some knowledge to circulate, but it was a matter of defending a status quo which seems more political than religious to me. But I agree anyway since it happened.
But wait, it does not necessarily involve meddling with the student mental development. Intelligence doesn't matter, what is taught matters. See communist regimes which both kept students under control and made them better students than western ones at the same time.
Finally, I have way bigger troubles considering puritanism a radical christian movement. They are not if they are influenced by terror- the True Christian(tm) afraid of the death of the body? Hmmmm. We catholics are not radical either, as the Vatican permits killing in self defense. I'd say Francis of Assisi was radical.
> Also, as it turns out the UI for Office 2007 isn't so bad after all.
it is different, that's the problem. joe user will have to spend time to relearn how to do the same stuff with the new program. I installed firefox on machines at work exactly one day after they were "upgraded" to IE7, guess why.
> Microsoft have in fairness spent a fair few billion on this new interface. That's more effort and investment than OO will ever get, ever, so the chances are it is going to be easier for users.
Two problems IMHO here. First you assume the billions were spent to make it easier for users. I say the billion actually spent on the interface are aimed at fidelizing the user, offering new functionality at the price of making difficult for users to migrate to the alternatives in the first place.
Second problem, by your reasoning Microsoft with 10x the resources of the competition oughta have better security than linux and a better user experience than macs. hmmmmm.
Hmmmm what if pirates get multiple copies of an mp3? they examine the differences between the files, minimally alter all the places where the differences occur (i.e. making the average of the sound when in phase), or even worse make an audio collage of the song from watermarked mp3s stolen from unprotected computers so it includes marks from multiple owners.
I totally agree, the pages one accesses often must be clean and fast. Google home has still things i didn't like (arial default font, failed to work as local page, and a look somewhat too anonymous). But that was easy to fix. It was also online (but the page was against google guidelines in several ways) and is still kinda accessible through the library
> Since when do we use base 1024 for counting anything but RAM?
In the days of the Apple II people and marketing used power of 2 for both ram and storage, as it's quite impractical to do otherwise when you worked so close to the metal (apple commodore and spectrum users often knew the address of ram and rom blocks for their machine).
Then some clever biz heads started using power of 10, but it was several years later.
Unfortunately, using the kilo- mega- etc. prefixes is accurate for base 10.
ODF was already there, Openoffice did mostly a good job of converting old word formats, OOXML is just trying to mess with document formats to leverage MS' still strong position.
Best way to keep formats free is the ODF plugin for office.
Re:So what - we are all NAT'ed anyway?
on
Hardening Linux
·
· Score: 1
My laptop is the NAT router, you insensitive clod!:)
Well, firstly it's Office Open XML, not Open Office XML.
Whoa. Try selling Koka Kola or MyCrewSoft-brand software and see how far you get. Just try - please.
Exactly. Or try selling "lindows".
To launch openoffice apps, on linux at least, one uses oowrite, oocalc, and so on. So OOXML name is a clear admission of hypocrisy: not a surprise to me anyway.
I don't buy a PS3 exactly because of the rootkit. But I criticized the PS3 mainly because Linux has not access to the whole hardware, the lack of ram expansion options, the braindead HD partition scheme. If new tech is crippled because of corporate strategies don't expect techies (either on slashdot or elsewhere) to like it.
Slashdot Mirror
The benefit is that a louder signal is perceived as a better signal by the ear. Since our sensitivity is not equally distributed along all frequencies a louder signal "acquires" more frequency range.
Of course that is a lower fidelity signal because high fidelity means reconstructing also the dynamics of the original sound, so to audiophiles a compressed signal sounds crappy.
I think the war started with sound engineers overcompressing stuff out of experimentation (in dance music compression is an important aspect, for instance). That made louder records stand out better in radio programming (even if radio stations have good compressors themselves nowadays) and casual listening, especially on crappy audio equipment.
Once the ear has adjusted itself to the loud recording, the less loud one sounds a little worse.
> Linus' comments on Debian seem old. Calling Debian (and especially Ubuntu) "technical" in nature doesn't jive.
:)
This is not the first time he's trolling
Well he did not call ubuntu technical, he called debian technical. Nevermind that in my recent experience debian installs are almost as painless as ubuntu ones.
In my experience, debian works beautifully on G2 and G4 hardware too but maybe he's had issues with his G5.
I did not say China never had culture. I say that most chinese now are aiming at western lifestyle, no matter what, because it's (incorrectly?) perceived as freedom. It's the same process, but more radical, that happened in the bastardization of western countries culture to the american one.
It's quite right that the way USA dealt with Iraq and terror suspects just creates more problems.
I don't subscribe to the assertion that politicians do it for stupidity.
IMHO Bush has powerful support that go beyond the two party system. Else he'd not have survived the questionable elections and 9/11's disturbing questions about bush and osama ex business relations.
Politicians are stupid because they are puppets, somewhere behind them there is people who wants this outcome: to be very paranoid i'd say USA has expired its role as young culture-less country because it has developed a kind of culture. So it's time for chinese and eastern people, the new young and culture-less (thanks to communism) countries.
Well somebody does, right here:
"Are you quite sure your historical bias against MS hasn't led you into hasty conclusions here?"
Besides, the guy in some position at Microsoft can say "we provided no financial incentives to paramount or dreamworks" without lying, while Microsoft could be behind it all nonetheless.
Replacing the internet is not possible. Either everybody switches overnight, or there is a period where these new networking tech/protocols must communicate with the old ones. So they essentially become part of the internet, nevermind it won't share the TCP/IP stack. Besides, a compatibility layer is needed for existing internet apps.
This is totally redundant, and there's no reason to do it - just like other companies writing operating systems when Windows Vista was being developed...
Wait, bad example...
Of course it is. You called Vista an operating system.
Operating systems make computers work, vista makes Gates rich.
> Omnes castelli vestris pertinent nobis sunt.
there, fixed it for ya.
It's sure easier to wire up South Korea than the USA. Anyway there are a couple points: US have quite more resources to devote to internet access, and the topic here was not the coverage but the service quality. So the ratio resources/territory is not as dramatically different than your comment seem to portray.
Another possible factor: ISPs that are also cable/telephone companies may not like their subscribers to save money using VoIP and internet TV.
even without cosidering ODF as proof, the alternative to "itsatrap" is: "Microsoft wants to give the world a free open and interoperable standard that makes it trivial for MS user base to migrate to alternative implementations".
I'd rather believe "Osama Bin Laden wants to become a nun".
So what do they (Linux and GPL) have to do with the topic, the article, or anything at hand?
The same that a burglar caught in the surroundings of a house with an empty sack at night has with committing a burglary?
I'm always admiring Microsoft-land, where accessing probably cached html pages requires acquiring a lock on db resources in a transaction. Oops shouldn't have dare spoken, it's probably a patented process.
The non-discriminatory part is not really enforceable IMHO. As I said in another comment, if the patent holder is a front for a big company (easy, in these days of multinational, electronic, anonymous money) the license can just be a little high to hurt the competition of the big company.
That might be catched by making the big company pay up for the difference in wealth from the old owner, but something a little more subtle may just work fine, like acting like a proxy. If a small frontend for a big company asks for high fees to license a patent, the big company can pay up no problems as it's a transfer of funds from one branch to the other. The competition has to pay an inflated price. Or doing something similar, like the way SCO made a big favour to M$ bluffing big time about linux.
> A lot of it probably has its roots with Christianity.
John taylor Gatto says quite the opposite: the industrial society, son of illuminism and industrial revolution, transformed culture in schooling. He probably is not attacking ideologically the industrial revolution, anyway, so neither am I.
I see a problem when you capitalize Christianity. We might go to the source as well:
Matthew 10:16
I am sending you out like sheep among wolves. Therefore be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves.
Being shrewd implies intelligence. Sharp intelligence, according to the dictionary, even. And how does Jesus address people he doesn't like? "Bad"? hmmm, very often he says, "hypocrite", underlining the lack of applying principles to behavior, which is a matter not only of good heart but also intelligence.
(note: of course now you may be trying to recall where indeed reason is attacked. But those passages IMO don't criticize reason per se, but its use outside its scope, applying reason to the domain of a transcendent god. Stupid example: a transcendent god and the concept of "being one" are incompatible. Strictly speaking a possible aspect of a god that is transcendent can't be considered "one" "two" "many" because there is no whatsoever guarantee that the concept has any meaning outside our dimension.
So I have troubles making the consideration about Christianity applicable to schooling.
You might mean religious men were lethal obstacles for some knowledge to circulate, but it was a matter of defending a status quo which seems more political than religious to me. But I agree anyway since it happened.
But wait, it does not necessarily involve meddling with the student mental development. Intelligence doesn't matter, what is taught matters. See communist regimes which both kept students under control and made them better students than western ones at the same time.
Finally, I have way bigger troubles considering puritanism a radical christian movement. They are not if they are influenced by terror- the True Christian(tm) afraid of the death of the body? Hmmmm. We catholics are not radical either, as the Vatican permits killing in self defense. I'd say Francis of Assisi was radical.
> Also, as it turns out the UI for Office 2007 isn't so bad after all.
it is different, that's the problem. joe user will have to spend time to relearn how to do the same stuff with the new program. I installed firefox on machines at work exactly one day after they were "upgraded" to IE7, guess why.
> Microsoft have in fairness spent a fair few billion on this new interface. That's more effort and investment than OO will ever get, ever, so the chances are it is going to be easier for users.
Two problems IMHO here. First you assume the billions were spent to make it easier for users. I say the billion actually spent on the interface are aimed at fidelizing the user, offering new functionality at the price of making difficult for users to migrate to the alternatives in the first place.
Second problem, by your reasoning Microsoft with 10x the resources of the competition oughta have better security than linux and a better user experience than macs. hmmmmm.
Hmmmm what if pirates get multiple copies of an mp3? they examine the differences between the files, minimally alter all the places where the differences occur (i.e. making the average of the sound when in phase), or even worse make an audio collage of the song from watermarked mp3s stolen from unprotected computers so it includes marks from multiple owners.
I totally agree, the pages one accesses often must be clean and fast. Google home has still things i didn't like (arial default font, failed to work as local page, and a look somewhat too anonymous). But that was easy to fix. It was also online (but the page was against google guidelines in several ways) and is still kinda accessible through the library
> Since when do we use base 1024 for counting anything but RAM?
In the days of the Apple II people and marketing used power of 2 for both ram and storage, as it's quite impractical to do otherwise when you worked so close to the metal (apple commodore and spectrum users often knew the address of ram and rom blocks for their machine).
Then some clever biz heads started using power of 10, but it was several years later.
Unfortunately, using the kilo- mega- etc. prefixes is accurate for base 10.
ODF was already there, Openoffice did mostly a good job of converting old word formats, OOXML is just trying to mess with document formats to leverage MS' still strong position.
Best way to keep formats free is the ODF plugin for office.
My laptop is the NAT router, you insensitive clod! :)
LOL, nice one, pal.
To launch openoffice apps, on linux at least, one uses oowrite, oocalc, and so on. So OOXML name is a clear admission of hypocrisy: not a surprise to me anyway.
Microsoft sucks, period.
I still haven't decided if Linux is better than MacOS from the desktop user point of view.
There goes your assertion.
I don't buy a PS3 exactly because of the rootkit. But I criticized the PS3 mainly because Linux has not access to the whole hardware, the lack of ram expansion options, the braindead HD partition scheme. If new tech is crippled because of corporate strategies don't expect techies (either on slashdot or elsewhere) to like it.