I think it'd get boring. Eternal life, I mean. No, seriously. After a while, you've done everything. Even God's Love has to get old eventually.
I suppose then you could take a trip down to hell and see how the other half lives. I mean, how bad could it be, swimming backwards through a river of shit?
Maybe you could hang out on earth and fuck with the psychics. You never know.
Still, it'd all get old eventually. Heaven would suffer from the worst case of Ennui you've seen this side of the cosmos.
*sigh* ahh, clinging to the illusion of an afterlife. If y'all weren't so naive, I'd call you pathetic.
That's taking 'monolithic kernel' to its extreme, now isn't it?
No, seriously. Linux by itself isn't an OS. To make it a modern OS, you need, at the very least, Linux, a HAL of some nature (like hotplug), X, a window manager like KDE, and the applications needed for basic functionality (file browser, application launcher, etc).
Hence, the term 'System' in Operating System.
Now, if this system was, say, Linux, a HAL, X, and Firefox-embedded, all sitting on a CF drive just big enough for everything to run and a half-a-gig of ram, you have the perfect platform for YouOS.
Of course, this is how Symphony OS works, 'cept it's also got fvwm to handle windows for native applications (The local web site you view is capable of doing anything root can do, and has UI hooks to do so. I think this makes its response time a little slow, as it runs on Perl.)
Not flamebait. I wouldn't say 100%, but a large enough portion of bloggers are trite, boring, self- or useless shit-obsessed humans to make blog-spotting an unforgiving task at best.
I'm assuming that if you're using FLAC or APE, you're not going to be sharing the files (2:1 is not a useful compression ratio for transfer, but can easily reduce the size of your archives when coupled with switching to DVDs.)
And honestly. FLAC and APE get about 2:1 compression. So does ZIP, GZ and BZ2 when applied to PCM. What, exactly, is the difference?
Bono is (not even) the latest in a long line of copyright extensions.
The first copyright law was 14 years ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Act_of_1790 ), and I'm sorry, but I think even that's too long. And corporations shouldn't be allowed to hold any of 'em.
Copyright is a granted monopoly. All a corporation would need is one hit media item (book, song, etc) to get enough money to lobby for extension. It's happened consistently across the world, to the detriment of the consumers and the public dom- hey!
3a) Hm. DRM makes no difference... but it is costing us a fortune... maybe we should try to do without. whaddya say guys? (guys): *shoots exec and replaces him with another android*
Not exactly. They have enough money to mismanage themselves for another twenty years. I'm sure that at SOME point one exec or another will stop spanking it long enough to notice that rearranging the chairs hasn't been doing them any good.
Still, be positive. If this does well, wouldn't you take watermarked over DRM'ed?
Not sure about the $2 price point, but if I don't have to listen to Ms. Simpson sing my name on every non-DRM'ed track they release, hopefully it won't come to that.
mmm, I dunno. After Sony fucked up with their rootkit, it seems CD protection is slowly going the way of the Dodo. Or the way of Dido, who seems also to have disappeared. But that's irrelevant.
Still, it's a good first step. Now they just have to get a good artist's stuff non-DRM'ed to get a reading of the most ravenous target market for such a move (i.e.: Geeks.)
Back when they first started trying to copy-protect CDs, I would almost always crack open the present-day P2P software, locate the CD in question and download it, just to prove a point.
And, since they were mostly shite, I'd delete it after first listen.
Good! ok, now consider this: In encoding audio to a DCT-based format (AAC, Ogg, MP3, etc), you are doing a few things. First, you're removing the stuff people can't hear. For example, if one frequency sound is loud enough to drown the other completely out, the other is not encoded. Next, you're applying a psychoacoustic model in an effort to further reduce the encoded data. This is a model that tells what we hear better than other things. The number of bits associated with each frequency is directly related to this model. Lastly, you are removing bits here and there to keep the encoded bitrate at a certain point.
i.e., 'losssy'. You're losing data that is on the edge of human perception. As the bitrate gets lower, that egde gets raised up.
Now, a 128k AAC is very close to a wav file, but try this experiment:
Grab a copy of lame. Grab a copy of Audacity. Rip a CD track to wav. Encode the track with lame. Load up both in audacity. Use the noise filter, with the whole mp3 as the noise profile. Now, remove noise from the wav.
Hear those squeaks, clicks, pops? The very quiet rendition of the song? That's all the stuff that was removed when converting a wav file to an mp3.
This is slightly quiter for the same bitrate of AAC, but not much. they're still in the same 3db range.
Huh?! Watermarking a movie is piss easy. Just introduce the data as low-level redundant noise.
I mean, hell. Encode it as a random-walk-shifted BARCODE across the screen just above the 1/8 lum visibility boundary. Most people will just dismiss it as almost invisible random noise, removing it would be nigh impossible, and we could do without the whole CSS/Encryption mess.
I submit to you that copyrights should be deemed illegal, or at the very least repaired back to the nominal seven years. I'd make a host of arguments for the point, but they're rarely listened to, so I'll just submit the concept and you may take the discussion as you've likely heard before.
Put it this way: I have a computer, a PDA, a PSP and an MP3 CD player in my car.
Please ask yourself what the common format playable on those devices is. No, it's not WMA. And don't even start about iTunes.
I'm not asking to be allowed to flop my collection on BitTorrent. I have no interest in it. I buy CDs for my own consumption. Though, if a personal friend asks for a copy, I'm happy to oblige.
In the meanwhile, I've had the ability to play music on whatever device I can get to play an MP3 since lame v1.0 came out. As such, DRM-encumbered legal 'music' downloads don't interest me. I can't play encrypted audio on my PDA, for example. I can't play WMAs in my car. Since I can't use these 'music' files, why would I want them?
The same goes for things like Vongo. Why would I care if I can't play them on my PSP? (No, I'm not buying UMDs. I never, ever buy data twice.) I'll just go buy a DVD and spent the two hours I would normally spend downloading (off of Vongo) transcoding for small-device playback.
And, hell. I don't even need the HD space to hold onto an archival quality version.
Note: music is in quotes above to reflect that, for most of my devices, DRM-encumbered files are functionally indistinguishable from white noise.
Look, it's a step, albeit small, in the right direction. I'll take watermarking over DRM any day.
And it seems fair. You take ownership - real ownership - of that which you download. If you let it into the wild (without proper cleaning) and get sued, that is your own damn fault.
'course, cleaning won't be that difficult; if this goes on a wide scale, you can bet that watermark removal will be the new World Hackers' Project. And done in a week.
Actually, the better attack would be the reverse of this: Many differing files with the same watermark (your name).
Or, for example, knowing where to look. Watermarks have to be in some stable place (for example, in the lower bit of the 400Hz-1000Hz portion of the stream, holding a single character and a pointer to a different standard range per-frame. Not that I know. It's just the way I'd do it.)
Truth is, though, scrambling the lower bits (or, better, antialiasing them so as to make the change while losing less quality) would do much the same thing.
Meh. I don't share anything not burned on a disc, so I really don't give a poo. (Why not? Think about it. If my friend was a sharer, do you think they'd be asking for shit from me?)
With the new evaporative diamonding techniques, how long do you think it'll be 'till I can buy full-diamond eyeglass lenses for the price of polycarbonate?
Slashdot Mirror
Hm.
I think it'd get boring. Eternal life, I mean. No, seriously. After a while, you've done everything. Even God's Love has to get old eventually.
I suppose then you could take a trip down to hell and see how the other half lives. I mean, how bad could it be, swimming backwards through a river of shit?
Maybe you could hang out on earth and fuck with the psychics. You never know.
Still, it'd all get old eventually. Heaven would suffer from the worst case of Ennui you've seen this side of the cosmos.
*sigh* ahh, clinging to the illusion of an afterlife. If y'all weren't so naive, I'd call you pathetic.
Snakes... through a PLANER
mmmm... tasty carnage mud....
Yeah, they deserved to die! And I hope they burn in hell!
Ok, I don't normally grouse about getting modded flamebait (in fact, I usually enjoy it), but, no. My above post is not flamebait.
I can guess the group alignment of the guy who flamebaited me. Someone who's in the "Blogs are the only form of truly free speech left!"
Yeah. Take yourself seriously. Please. Someone's got to.
No, really. You're free to speak. That's not to say you're worth listening to.
That's taking 'monolithic kernel' to its extreme, now isn't it?
No, seriously. Linux by itself isn't an OS. To make it a modern OS, you need, at the very least, Linux, a HAL of some nature (like hotplug), X, a window manager like KDE, and the applications needed for basic functionality (file browser, application launcher, etc).
Hence, the term 'System' in Operating System.
Now, if this system was, say, Linux, a HAL, X, and Firefox-embedded, all sitting on a CF drive just big enough for everything to run and a half-a-gig of ram, you have the perfect platform for YouOS.
Of course, this is how Symphony OS works, 'cept it's also got fvwm to handle windows for native applications (The local web site you view is capable of doing anything root can do, and has UI hooks to do so. I think this makes its response time a little slow, as it runs on Perl.)
Not flamebait. I wouldn't say 100%, but a large enough portion of bloggers are trite, boring, self- or useless shit-obsessed humans to make blog-spotting an unforgiving task at best.
Troll?
Heh. If you say so, Slashdot.
Not sure what you mean by 'Paper Tiger', but this is the typical sort of interference in one's personal life that comes with living in a condo.
I'm assuming that if you're using FLAC or APE, you're not going to be sharing the files (2:1 is not a useful compression ratio for transfer, but can easily reduce the size of your archives when coupled with switching to DVDs.)
And honestly. FLAC and APE get about 2:1 compression. So does ZIP, GZ and BZ2 when applied to PCM. What, exactly, is the difference?
Bono is (not even) the latest in a long line of copyright extensions.
0 ), and I'm sorry, but I think even that's too long. And corporations shouldn't be allowed to hold any of 'em.
The first copyright law was 14 years ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Act_of_179
Copyright is a granted monopoly. All a corporation would need is one hit media item (book, song, etc) to get enough money to lobby for extension. It's happened consistently across the world, to the detriment of the consumers and the public dom- hey!
I though I said take the discussion as read!
3a) Hm. DRM makes no difference... but it is costing us a fortune... maybe we should try to do without. whaddya say guys? (guys): *shoots exec and replaces him with another android*
Not exactly. They have enough money to mismanage themselves for another twenty years. I'm sure that at SOME point one exec or another will stop spanking it long enough to notice that rearranging the chairs hasn't been doing them any good.
Still, be positive. If this does well, wouldn't you take watermarked over DRM'ed?
Not sure about the $2 price point, but if I don't have to listen to Ms. Simpson sing my name on every non-DRM'ed track they release, hopefully it won't come to that.
Here here! I say we Bryan's should band together and throw off the chains imposed upon the DRM overlords we welcomed a week ago on Slashdot!
mmm, I dunno. After Sony fucked up with their rootkit, it seems CD protection is slowly going the way of the Dodo. Or the way of Dido, who seems also to have disappeared. But that's irrelevant.
Still, it's a good first step. Now they just have to get a good artist's stuff non-DRM'ed to get a reading of the most ravenous target market for such a move (i.e.: Geeks.)
You know, that's truer that you think?
Back when they first started trying to copy-protect CDs, I would almost always crack open the present-day P2P software, locate the CD in question and download it, just to prove a point.
And, since they were mostly shite, I'd delete it after first listen.
>_<
Ok. Look up DCT transforms.
Good. Now look up the meaning of 'Lossy'.
Good! ok, now consider this:
In encoding audio to a DCT-based format (AAC, Ogg, MP3, etc), you are doing a few things. First, you're removing the stuff people can't hear. For example, if one frequency sound is loud enough to drown the other completely out, the other is not encoded. Next, you're applying a psychoacoustic model in an effort to further reduce the encoded data. This is a model that tells what we hear better than other things. The number of bits associated with each frequency is directly related to this model. Lastly, you are removing bits here and there to keep the encoded bitrate at a certain point.
i.e., 'losssy'. You're losing data that is on the edge of human perception. As the bitrate gets lower, that egde gets raised up.
Now, a 128k AAC is very close to a wav file, but try this experiment:
Grab a copy of lame. Grab a copy of Audacity. Rip a CD track to wav. Encode the track with lame. Load up both in audacity. Use the noise filter, with the whole mp3 as the noise profile. Now, remove noise from the wav.
Hear those squeaks, clicks, pops? The very quiet rendition of the song? That's all the stuff that was removed when converting a wav file to an mp3.
This is slightly quiter for the same bitrate of AAC, but not much. they're still in the same 3db range.
Huh?! Watermarking a movie is piss easy. Just introduce the data as low-level redundant noise.
I mean, hell. Encode it as a random-walk-shifted BARCODE across the screen just above the 1/8 lum visibility boundary. Most people will just dismiss it as almost invisible random noise, removing it would be nigh impossible, and we could do without the whole CSS/Encryption mess.
"this is a massive audience that Yahoo, Napster, Rhapsody, exc can't touch"
While eMule and BitTorrent touch, caress, stroke and fondle it.
And, if you've downloaded Tenacious D, Double Team it.
Wow. I think you forgot to prepend IANAL there.
I submit to you that copyrights should be deemed illegal, or at the very least repaired back to the nominal seven years. I'd make a host of arguments for the point, but they're rarely listened to, so I'll just submit the concept and you may take the discussion as you've likely heard before.
Feh. Another human sans gadgets.
Put it this way: I have a computer, a PDA, a PSP and an MP3 CD player in my car.
Please ask yourself what the common format playable on those devices is. No, it's not WMA. And don't even start about iTunes.
I'm not asking to be allowed to flop my collection on BitTorrent. I have no interest in it. I buy CDs for my own consumption. Though, if a personal friend asks for a copy, I'm happy to oblige.
In the meanwhile, I've had the ability to play music on whatever device I can get to play an MP3 since lame v1.0 came out. As such, DRM-encumbered legal 'music' downloads don't interest me. I can't play encrypted audio on my PDA, for example. I can't play WMAs in my car. Since I can't use these 'music' files, why would I want them?
The same goes for things like Vongo. Why would I care if I can't play them on my PSP? (No, I'm not buying UMDs. I never, ever buy data twice.) I'll just go buy a DVD and spent the two hours I would normally spend downloading (off of Vongo) transcoding for small-device playback.
And, hell. I don't even need the HD space to hold onto an archival quality version.
Note: music is in quotes above to reflect that, for most of my devices, DRM-encumbered files are functionally indistinguishable from white noise.
Nah. I'm thinking the extra dollar is to pay for Ms. Simpson to sit in a room singing hundereds of names for a week or two.
Hey, hold up.
Look, it's a step, albeit small, in the right direction. I'll take watermarking over DRM any day.
And it seems fair. You take ownership - real ownership - of that which you download. If you let it into the wild (without proper cleaning) and get sued, that is your own damn fault.
'course, cleaning won't be that difficult; if this goes on a wide scale, you can bet that watermark removal will be the new World Hackers' Project. And done in a week.
Since nonaudibles are lost in the transition between raw wavedata and mp3, you've no worries about watermarking issues.
Actually, the better attack would be the reverse of this: Many differing files with the same watermark (your name).
Or, for example, knowing where to look. Watermarks have to be in some stable place (for example, in the lower bit of the 400Hz-1000Hz portion of the stream, holding a single character and a pointer to a different standard range per-frame. Not that I know. It's just the way I'd do it.)
Truth is, though, scrambling the lower bits (or, better, antialiasing them so as to make the change while losing less quality) would do much the same thing.
Meh. I don't share anything not burned on a disc, so I really don't give a poo. (Why not? Think about it. If my friend was a sharer, do you think they'd be asking for shit from me?)
Heyyyy....
With the new evaporative diamonding techniques, how long do you think it'll be 'till I can buy full-diamond eyeglass lenses for the price of polycarbonate?