It doesn't matter what the legislators cared about when they passed the law IMO. What matters is what effect the law has.
I couldn't disagree more. The intention of an act shows in its language, context and the records of parliamentary (or congessional) discussion. If an act is only worded to make it palletable but is intended to be sinister, this shows through. I point to the DMCA and PATRIOT Act as examples where the true intention is easily discernable from the context the legislation was forged in. Furthermore, if an act has an insidious intention, whatever the language of the act, it will enable whatever hidden agenda is behind it to be carried out. Intention is everything in the law. It is often the case that legislation is repealed or altered due to apparent disconnects between effect and intention. Examples abound in Australian law, read some of the terror legislation, think about its effect, and then read the corresponding entries in the Hansard (records of parliamentary debate). I think what you will find will alarm you greatly.
You realize the two arguments are not equivalent, and the invalidity of one does not imply the same about the other. Right?
a) It was a remark made primarily in jest.
b) While not equivalent, I was making the point that the stated intention of the government action is completely removed from the actual intent of the government action. So there is a parallel.
Legislating against the symptoms of a problem is like a band aid on a broken arm. Save the money and catch the guys who make it in the first place. Such a move would a) be more effective b) cheaper and c) not involve giving up civil liberties.
Besides, do you actually swallow that crap about the legislature caring about kids?
But I can see your precedent. Terrorists are killing us because we have freedoms. So the answer is to take them away! Then they don't have to kill because of our freedoms, because they'll have been taken away! Yipee! Republican logic at its giddy highs.
The black holes would only eat up Kurt Vonnegut. However, the efect would be the same as if they ate up the whole world, since it's all a figment of his imagination.
Not really. After falling into the event horizon, he would become the only matter in the history of the universe to have been ejected in entirely from the other side of the event horizon. See, not even a black hole can stomach his crap.
Any particular reason that you think browsing disturbing images should be a crime? I agree, it'd make you a sick whacko, but since when did we decide to lock up all sick whackos even if they didn't actually do anything? I think I must have missed something while I was on safari in Iran...
No. FTFA: "Warner switched from using the MPEG-2 compression codec to VC-1,"
Both discs have the same approximate capacity. Switching codecs is not dependent on the disc itself. If Blue Ray "wins" the hardware war, but VC-1 from the HD-DVD camp is a better codec, I would hope the studios didn't just continue to blindly use MPEG.
What I am saying is that hardware has nothing to do with it. Tying a codec/software package/voodoo prayer to hardware is does NOT mean the hardware in one is better.
Blue Ray and HD-DVD are both just data discs. Any difference between them is NOT due to the disc or the technology or anything like that, but the mastering process the studio takes. Picture quality and audio quality isnt affected by the Blue Ray or HD-DVD disc any more than the sound quality of your MP3s is affected by your having a Seagate hard drive vs a Maxtor hard drive.
I'm sorry, but some products are just intuitively BS.
15% extra framerate? By offloading the network stack to a dedicated GPU? That's like saying the network stack accounts for 15% of the PC's current load. Given that network's worked fine back when then-top-end entire PCs accounted for less than 1% of an average modern PC's processing capacity, this is INTUITIVELY a load of BS.
If your PC is so poxy that bit torrent loads it up to breaking point (or even to barely noticable point for that matter) then the $300 would be better spent on a new CPU. Dual core AMD64 chips are as cheap as... umm... chips these days.
Yea, there may be limitations to the format, but I don't see bitrate peeling as being a mainstream feature that will cause *any* dent in MP3's use. Furthermore, it may even be possible. Finally, with computing power what it is, transcoding on the fly to multiple bitrates is trivial for a reasonably powerful machine. Only one machine would have to do it, and the sources could be split off and delivered by the streaming server farm.
Multi channel audio is built into any audio format by simply muxing as many streams as you want. Clever differential algorithms may be able to get bandwidth bonuses, and MP3 *does* support joint stereo AFAIK. Even if it doesn't and never could, I don't see this as a hindrant to MP3s continued dominance as THE audio playback format for the forseeable future.
Fedora Core and {,K,X}ubuntu don't support MP3 out of the box. Apple is pushing AAC instead of MP3, and seems very successful. Somehow, many portable players nowadays support WMA, and I've seen people have quite a few WMA files on their PCs. These are definitely signs.
I do concede this point. However I think that in 4 years, unless MP3 has been pushed into an irreversible death slide, once it becomes public domain, an army of coders will descent upon it like flies on elephant droppings and close any gap between MP3 and its competing formats, eliminating the competitive advantages of those competitors. As I said, unless MP3 is already irrevocably on its deathbed, there will be no further reason to continue on the path of alternative codecs.
The bulk of MP3s I see are 128 Kbps. I'd say it's still the de-facto standard bitrate. Many sources seem to agree with me.
Not really, it is a rare occurrence indeed that I can find a song in 128 but not anything higher.
Aww I was really hoping you'd take up my challenge, as I've always wanted to conduct this. Perhaps we could do it as an open test, and get other slashdotters involved?
1. Gapless can be done reasonably well by the player software 2. This is a problem with Rockbox, not the MP3 format 3. Any feature gap between OGG and MP3 will be addressed and closed within minutes of MP3 becoming public domain. I'd be willing to bet there are people out there with code already, just waiting for the MP3 algos to become PD.
I believe once MP3 is in the public domain, all the missing features will be added, all the bugs worked out and it will catch up and even leapfrog OGG, due to the larger interest group.
We'll have to wait and see. I believe the expiry of MP3 patents will result in a rebirth of MP3 as a developing beast, as every coder and his pet ninja monkey will start working on it.
It depends how compelling it is. Switching away from MP3 is not that difficult. People I know have done it in a couple of days. Not that I think switching will be compelling enough in the foreseeable future.
A standard as entrenched as MP3 I don't think will be moved in 4 years without signs of beginnings in that direction. No such signs exist.
What, exactly, do you mean by "going to happen"? Vorbis is already being used in plenty of places; various portable audio players support it, I've seen games use Vorbis for sound and music, Wikipedia uses it, Allofmp3 allows you to buy songs encoded as Vorbis (as well as FLAC, IIRC), at least on Internet TV station uses Ogg Vorbis and Theora for broadcasting. I would say Ogg Vorbis is definitely happening.
Define "going to happen". OK, Grab the current Billboard Top 40. Search any popular P2P network, get the total audio encodings of the top 40 songs. When one quarter of the returned files are in Vorbis, I'll consider it to have "happened".
That's quite subjective. I find that MP3s, even at the de-facto standard 128 Kbps, tend to have annoying distortions.
Hello? 1997? This is 2006 calling. I have some information about MP3s. The MP3 scene moved to 192kbits in 2000 and then to unconstrained VBR in 2002. I challenge you to a duel. I will take 5 CD tracks of your choosing, encode each of them in MP3 (at or below 256kbits VBR), decode it. Then OGG and decode it (you can choose the specs). I will then send you the resulting 15 WAV (44.1kHz PCM) files and see how many you can tell were MP3, which were OGG and which are original. If you're up for this, reply with the title of a CD to use, and the 5 tracks on it you want to use. I will then get the CD, perform the encodings, and send you a list of what I've done encrypted with AES256. After you've chosen which is which, I'll give you the decryption key for the file descriptors.
You seem to conject that, in 4 years, MP3 will be in the public domain, removing the last reason to prefer Vorbis over it. I will offer the prediction that, in 4 years, Vorbis will have improved even further beyond what MP3 can manage, and switching will be even more compelling than it is now.
MP3 is already considered transparent (see my pchallenge above). It is also small enough to for flash memory capacities today, so shaving off a minor amount is not necessary. If we're going to constantly shift formats for incremental benefits, there'd be no point having standards at all, and all that would happen is players would have to support many more legacy formats than there are today, and it's already a dog's breakfast of formats. There comes a time when a technology fits what you need it for more than adequately (as MP3 does), and incremental improvements should be ignored. Linus said it best: "Perfection is the worst enemy of good enough" with regards to BSD's superior codebase over Linux. Sure, you can wait to get it perfect. But while you're doing that, reality passes you by.
Slashdot Mirror
b) While not equivalent, I was making the point that the stated intention of the government action is completely removed from the actual intent of the government action. So there is a parallel.
Legislating against the symptoms of a problem is like a band aid on a broken arm. Save the money and catch the guys who make it in the first place. Such a move would a) be more effective b) cheaper and c) not involve giving up civil liberties.
Besides, do you actually swallow that crap about the legislature caring about kids?
But I can see your precedent. Terrorists are killing us because we have freedoms. So the answer is to take them away! Then they don't have to kill because of our freedoms, because they'll have been taken away! Yipee! Republican logic at its giddy highs.
The black holes would only eat up Kurt Vonnegut. However, the efect would be the same as if they ate up the whole world, since it's all a figment of his imagination.
Not really. After falling into the event horizon, he would become the only matter in the history of the universe to have been ejected in entirely from the other side of the event horizon. See, not even a black hole can stomach his crap.
Any particular reason that you think browsing disturbing images should be a crime? I agree, it'd make you a sick whacko, but since when did we decide to lock up all sick whackos even if they didn't actually do anything? I think I must have missed something while I was on safari in Iran...
Keep telling yourself that.
No. FTFA: "Warner switched from using the MPEG-2 compression codec to VC-1,"
Both discs have the same approximate capacity. Switching codecs is not dependent on the disc itself. If Blue Ray "wins" the hardware war, but VC-1 from the HD-DVD camp is a better codec, I would hope the studios didn't just continue to blindly use MPEG.
What I am saying is that hardware has nothing to do with it. Tying a codec/software package/voodoo prayer to hardware is does NOT mean the hardware in one is better.
Blue Ray and HD-DVD are both just data discs. Any difference between them is NOT due to the disc or the technology or anything like that, but the mastering process the studio takes. Picture quality and audio quality isnt affected by the Blue Ray or HD-DVD disc any more than the sound quality of your MP3s is affected by your having a Seagate hard drive vs a Maxtor hard drive.
I hear nussing, I see nussing, I know nussing!
I'm sorry, but some products are just intuitively BS.
15% extra framerate? By offloading the network stack to a dedicated GPU? That's like saying the network stack accounts for 15% of the PC's current load. Given that network's worked fine back when then-top-end entire PCs accounted for less than 1% of an average modern PC's processing capacity, this is INTUITIVELY a load of BS.
For about $500 US I could bulid an entire new PC with a dual core AMD CPU.
If that doesn't put the $300 price of a NIC into perspective, then yes, the maker of snakeoil NICs deserves your money more than you do.
"or even to barely noticable point for that matter"
In other words, bit torrent should be a trivial load. If it isn't, your computer could benefit from something other than a $300 NIC.
If your PC is so poxy that bit torrent loads it up to breaking point (or even to barely noticable point for that matter) then the $300 would be better spent on a new CPU. Dual core AMD64 chips are as cheap as... umm... chips these days.
Yea, because CPUs struggle under the massive computational load presented by the awesome size of the 1960s developed TCP/IP protocol.
Wow that's a fantastic idea!
It's "too stupid to live". If you're going to take a holier than thou attitude, at least make sure that you are literate.
Like this?
And the billowing smoke from the counting office won't tip anyone off.
What's a trocious and where can I buy one?
A pile of electrons is a little easier to hide than a pile of election ballots.
Yea, there may be limitations to the format, but I don't see bitrate peeling as being a mainstream feature that will cause *any* dent in MP3's use. Furthermore, it may even be possible. Finally, with computing power what it is, transcoding on the fly to multiple bitrates is trivial for a reasonably powerful machine. Only one machine would have to do it, and the sources could be split off and delivered by the streaming server farm.
:)
Multi channel audio is built into any audio format by simply muxing as many streams as you want. Clever differential algorithms may be able to get bandwidth bonuses, and MP3 *does* support joint stereo AFAIK. Even if it doesn't and never could, I don't see this as a hindrant to MP3s continued dominance as THE audio playback format for the forseeable future.
WRT audio test... watch my blog (mrnaz.com)
I do concede this point. However I think that in 4 years, unless MP3 has been pushed into an irreversible death slide, once it becomes public domain, an army of coders will descent upon it like flies on elephant droppings and close any gap between MP3 and its competing formats, eliminating the competitive advantages of those competitors. As I said, unless MP3 is already irrevocably on its deathbed, there will be no further reason to continue on the path of alternative codecs.
Not really, it is a rare occurrence indeed that I can find a song in 128 but not anything higher.
Aww I was really hoping you'd take up my challenge, as I've always wanted to conduct this. Perhaps we could do it as an open test, and get other slashdotters involved?
1. Gapless can be done reasonably well by the player software
2. This is a problem with Rockbox, not the MP3 format
3. Any feature gap between OGG and MP3 will be addressed and closed within minutes of MP3 becoming public domain. I'd be willing to bet there are people out there with code already, just waiting for the MP3 algos to become PD.
Yours sincerely,
Mr. RC.
Umm... no.
/me looks around.
MP3 has been "dying" since 2002.
Nah, I don't think so.
I believe once MP3 is in the public domain, all the missing features will be added, all the bugs worked out and it will catch up and even leapfrog OGG, due to the larger interest group.
We'll have to wait and see. I believe the expiry of MP3 patents will result in a rebirth of MP3 as a developing beast, as every coder and his pet ninja monkey will start working on it.
- Naz.
A standard as entrenched as MP3 I don't think will be moved in 4 years without signs of beginnings in that direction. No such signs exist.
Define "going to happen". OK, Grab the current Billboard Top 40. Search any popular P2P network, get the total audio encodings of the top 40 songs. When one quarter of the returned files are in Vorbis, I'll consider it to have "happened".
Hello? 1997? This is 2006 calling. I have some information about MP3s. The MP3 scene moved to 192kbits in 2000 and then to unconstrained VBR in 2002. I challenge you to a duel. I will take 5 CD tracks of your choosing, encode each of them in MP3 (at or below 256kbits VBR), decode it. Then OGG and decode it (you can choose the specs). I will then send you the resulting 15 WAV (44.1kHz PCM) files and see how many you can tell were MP3, which were OGG and which are original. If you're up for this, reply with the title of a CD to use, and the 5 tracks on it you want to use. I will then get the CD, perform the encodings, and send you a list of what I've done encrypted with AES256. After you've chosen which is which, I'll give you the decryption key for the file descriptors.
MP3 is already considered transparent (see my pchallenge above). It is also small enough to for flash memory capacities today, so shaving off a minor amount is not necessary. If we're going to constantly shift formats for incremental benefits, there'd be no point having standards at all, and all that would happen is players would have to support many more legacy formats than there are today, and it's already a dog's breakfast of formats. There comes a time when a technology fits what you need it for more than adequately (as MP3 does), and incremental improvements should be ignored. Linus said it best: "Perfection is the worst enemy of good enough" with regards to BSD's superior codebase over Linux. Sure, you can wait to get it perfect. But while you're doing that, reality passes you by.