1) not been around much, I see 2) yes 3) an ATSC tuner can decode a lot of combinations. Native resolution is the highest denominator that the media has in terms of resolution. Cheap HDTVs have 720. Most HDs have 1080i, with an increase in the past year of 1080p. Down-converts take the higher, and squeeze it to a lower. Some is objectionable and lossy, some not. Native resolution refers to the original stream, not with how it's stanched by a provider to squeeze in more streams. 4) Look in a mirror.
I could use an antenna. There are no choices that do better, or even a single choice, in my region. So I can do without..... or get a half-assed offering.
A codec is a compressor/decompressor piece of code that's used in one of two circumstances-- lossy or non-lossy stream compression, usually (but not always) of audio/video information. The eye and ear can detect certain types lossy compression effects, and some people are better at detecting problems than others. Generally, more compression yields more information loss that is sensed by low quality video (jaggies, weird frame transitions, noise, fewer colors, or distorted sound of various kinds). But more compression means less bandwidth used, so that more streams can be handled per given bandwidth 'space'.
In the US, the current max horizontal by vertical HD TV resolution is 1080 pixels, and its data rate at full color value is about 16megabits/sec. There are two types, interlaced and progressive scans. Interlaced writes and holds information from frame to frame while progressive writes whole frames (a simple explanation) and progressive is preferred but requires more intelligent electronics to produce. The 1080p HD picture is preferred. An interim size, 720p, is often what cable companies send down the wires to your set. The native resolution refers to the uncompressed data rate, or one that's used with a non-lossy compressor (meaning that the decompressor can re-interpret the compressed stream to reproduce the original image 100%).
In the US, Comcast uses codex compression to squeeze HD on their cable systems. When people get to see native resolution at the TV store, then get the Comcast version when they plug in their shiny new HD TV, they wonder WTF? That the beeb would put their foot on the garden hose and expect no one to notice is ludicrous.
I wish the FCC would get involved in the US to force cable companies to limit the number of channels supported and broadcast them in the highest sustainable resolution-- or tell their users the truth about what's happening and why. Maybe we can start to get rid of the excess junk channels.
TeaseWare is what they call it. It's like shareware-crippled versioning but designed to give you a 'taste'.
I don't think MySQL goes that route at all, though. MySQL is embarrassingly successful to Oracle, and they could use it for pride as well as magnetism.
You've heard of LAMP: Linux/Apache/MySQL/Perl-php-etc. Now there's Linux/Apache/Oracle/Perl-php-etc.
Nah, I don't think so. This analogy of Oracle for The Big Stuff and MySQL for The Little Stuff is for the birds. MySQL launched a lot of great apps and platforms that Oracle couldn't touch because of their price and perception of being Big Stuff. There's every reason to believe that they'll continue to let MySQL evolve, and perhaps use that evolution to improve their own stuff-- and their ability to get developers to gravitate towards Oracle products rather than MySQL.
Being held hostage is a bad idea. There are lots of decent drop boxes out there. Use them. Or break down and get a coupla firewire drives (or equiv) and stop feeding the monster.
Schmidt exposed the reality: Google's mission is to sell info about you. They're trolls, and huge trolls at that.
The best way to get around them is to bot some machines in Belarus and randomly proxy across them. Otherwise, they'll eventually figure it out.
Yes, we know we're paying for infrastructure, 24/7 repair/CS, and so on. Pay tiers are ok-- only if you get that capacity over that period, and study after study after study shows you DO NOT.
Worse, if allowed, Comcast will let NBC go faster along with their VOiP and other QoS-related services. If you don't believe this, you're a fool.
WIth water, you get a specific pipe at a specific pressure (and temperature, probably) that yeilds a MAX of the water you can use.
With electricity, you get a specific MAX amperage of service that can be sustained.
Both utilities will charge you huge fortunes if you use the maximum output 24/7.
With broadband, you get a pipe that's capable of a sustained data rate. Upstream, however, data will come when it will come, subject to QoS or packet shaping. If you download at the max rate, 24/7, it's likely your hard disk will simply fill, and that's that-- your capacity has been reached.
What net neutrality does is to forward the idea that no matter where you want your data from, the carrier delivers a best-effort to deliver that data to you. In this scheme, it doesn't favor its product over another vendors; it's neutral as to the destination. Certainly latency, routing, and congestion issues apply, but it doesn't squish YouTube in favor of NBC (are you listening, Comcast?).
The aperiodicity of transaction means that congestion could be a problem, especially during the Superbowl or other 'events' where everyone's downloading at once. Otherwise, there's a fairly random distribution of duty cycle that allows bandwidth to be shared. However, older network designs, like ATM and a few others that are still carriers of data, aren't very good at doing that. Older routing equipment and ancient equipment (by modern standards) still presents a non-neutral bottleneck, although not one that's deterministic by data source.
So it's not like water and electricity, although it could still be considered a utility by other definitions. Communications ought to be a utility, and ought to be product source (e.g. the water, and the coulombs) neutral.
But it gets still worse sometimes. A colleague of mine resigned after naked and compromised pics emerged. They were a dozen years old, and unmistakably her. Yes, she's married with three children and doing a great job professionally, but she couldn't stand the thought of people mentally undressing her all the time.
The PHB knew she did porn at one time; she had told him about it. She needed the money, then graduated, got a post grad degree, and distanced herself from her 'former' life.
Uh, no, the GPL isn't a copyright license, it's a procedural use of code that may or may not otherwise be bound by copyright. The 'open' side of the license, should a coder be bound by it, doesn't nullify copyright, and never did. It's a usage license that defines the procedure under which the code can subsequently be used, how modifications are treated, and says how the use of the code binds one to the obligations of the license.
This simply isn't true. The choices have been there for a long time. Palm could have used something else. They didn't. They could have also complied with the GPL license, and no sweat, no harm, no fowl. They didn't, it appears.
The terms are really simple here, and the violation is obvious. If you distribute mods, you must distribute code. No evidence of code out there.... and the app doesn't exist in a vacuum. The argument really isn't legitimate. If fact, it's quite clear what the problem is: violation.
One step at a time. You won't get a uniform behavior code out of the bribed (oops, campaign-contributed/heavily lobbied) congress, so heavy breathing down their neck is at least a start.
The threat of litigation doesn't mean as much as it used to. It costs the gov the same $$ go send lawyers, do depositions, get into discovery, try and settle, then go to trial as it does the plaintiff (Verizon in this case).
That said, at least Obama's regime is doing something visible about outrageous telco behavior. The prior regime would have done a thumbs-up to Verizon.
NPR's CPB funding wasn't seriously jeapordized. You may recall that the Kroc foundation gave them a huge sum of money, and their endowment's been reasonably steady-- although they'll always need money.
Uncritical reporting doesn't get hits. And page views != quality. There needs to be another metric that helps vet sources of real reporting, rather than those that are only thinly venered opinion without fact checking. Then someone needs to keep score about who was BS and who was real.... after the fact.
The problem is that we only measure quantity, not quality in information disemination.
Me and 350M others. They can watch all they want. Add in twitter, myspace, linked-in, and every other gawdforsaken social network. Hey, we do it-- why not them? When they start poking into private space, and none of the aforementioned have a reasonable expectation of privacy as they're public places, then I'll get testy. Until then, I hope they don't waste too much taxpayer money on it.
On the other hand, let's see what Fusion Garage ships. Might be ok. Too bad Arrington gets cut out of the deal. You'd think a lawyer would have better smarts about these things.
Slashdot Mirror
1) not been around much, I see
2) yes
3) an ATSC tuner can decode a lot of combinations. Native resolution is the highest denominator that the media has in terms of resolution. Cheap HDTVs have 720. Most HDs have 1080i, with an increase in the past year of 1080p. Down-converts take the higher, and squeeze it to a lower. Some is objectionable and lossy, some not. Native resolution refers to the original stream, not with how it's stanched by a provider to squeeze in more streams.
4) Look in a mirror.
Codex is the plural of 'codec'. It could also be stated 'codecs'. It's an abbreviation of COmpressor/DECompressor, in the plural.
I could use an antenna. There are no choices that do better, or even a single choice, in my region. So I can do without..... or get a half-assed offering.
A codec is a compressor/decompressor piece of code that's used in one of two circumstances-- lossy or non-lossy stream compression, usually (but not always) of audio/video information. The eye and ear can detect certain types lossy compression effects, and some people are better at detecting problems than others. Generally, more compression yields more information loss that is sensed by low quality video (jaggies, weird frame transitions, noise, fewer colors, or distorted sound of various kinds). But more compression means less bandwidth used, so that more streams can be handled per given bandwidth 'space'.
In the US, the current max horizontal by vertical HD TV resolution is 1080 pixels, and its data rate at full color value is about 16megabits/sec. There are two types, interlaced and progressive scans. Interlaced writes and holds information from frame to frame while progressive writes whole frames (a simple explanation) and progressive is preferred but requires more intelligent electronics to produce. The 1080p HD picture is preferred. An interim size, 720p, is often what cable companies send down the wires to your set. The native resolution refers to the uncompressed data rate, or one that's used with a non-lossy compressor (meaning that the decompressor can re-interpret the compressed stream to reproduce the original image 100%).
In the US, Comcast uses codex compression to squeeze HD on their cable systems. When people get to see native resolution at the TV store, then get the Comcast version when they plug in their shiny new HD TV, they wonder WTF? That the beeb would put their foot on the garden hose and expect no one to notice is ludicrous.
I wish the FCC would get involved in the US to force cable companies to limit the number of channels supported and broadcast them in the highest sustainable resolution-- or tell their users the truth about what's happening and why. Maybe we can start to get rid of the excess junk channels.
None at all.
The man is obviously a twit.
May justice be served.
You were listening to your iPod. Microsoft is pretty sticky about copyrights.
And while they've been boorish in other ways, owning up to the theft of code and withdrawing the site shows they respect the license and the breech.
I would venture to say that they're back to the drawing board.... again.
TeaseWare is what they call it. It's like shareware-crippled versioning but designed to give you a 'taste'.
I don't think MySQL goes that route at all, though. MySQL is embarrassingly successful to Oracle, and they could use it for pride as well as magnetism.
My hope: it humbles and teaches them.
You've heard of LAMP: Linux/Apache/MySQL/Perl-php-etc.
Now there's Linux/Apache/Oracle/Perl-php-etc.
Nah, I don't think so. This analogy of Oracle for The Big Stuff and MySQL for The Little Stuff is for the birds. MySQL launched a lot of great apps and platforms that Oracle couldn't touch because of their price and perception of being Big Stuff. There's every reason to believe that they'll continue to let MySQL evolve, and perhaps use that evolution to improve their own stuff-- and their ability to get developers to gravitate towards Oracle products rather than MySQL.
Mod parent up.
Being held hostage is a bad idea. There are lots of decent drop boxes out there. Use them. Or break down and get a coupla firewire drives (or equiv) and stop feeding the monster.
Schmidt exposed the reality: Google's mission is to sell info about you. They're trolls, and huge trolls at that.
The best way to get around them is to bot some machines in Belarus and randomly proxy across them. Otherwise, they'll eventually figure it out.
Then you're Tiger Woods.
Yes, we know we're paying for infrastructure, 24/7 repair/CS, and so on. Pay tiers are ok-- only if you get that capacity over that period, and study after study after study shows you DO NOT.
Worse, if allowed, Comcast will let NBC go faster along with their VOiP and other QoS-related services. If you don't believe this, you're a fool.
WIth water, you get a specific pipe at a specific pressure (and temperature, probably) that yeilds a MAX of the water you can use.
With electricity, you get a specific MAX amperage of service that can be sustained.
Both utilities will charge you huge fortunes if you use the maximum output 24/7.
With broadband, you get a pipe that's capable of a sustained data rate. Upstream, however, data will come when it will come, subject to QoS or packet shaping. If you download at the max rate, 24/7, it's likely your hard disk will simply fill, and that's that-- your capacity has been reached.
What net neutrality does is to forward the idea that no matter where you want your data from, the carrier delivers a best-effort to deliver that data to you. In this scheme, it doesn't favor its product over another vendors; it's neutral as to the destination. Certainly latency, routing, and congestion issues apply, but it doesn't squish YouTube in favor of NBC (are you listening, Comcast?).
The aperiodicity of transaction means that congestion could be a problem, especially during the Superbowl or other 'events' where everyone's downloading at once. Otherwise, there's a fairly random distribution of duty cycle that allows bandwidth to be shared. However, older network designs, like ATM and a few others that are still carriers of data, aren't very good at doing that. Older routing equipment and ancient equipment (by modern standards) still presents a non-neutral bottleneck, although not one that's deterministic by data source.
So it's not like water and electricity, although it could still be considered a utility by other definitions. Communications ought to be a utility, and ought to be product source (e.g. the water, and the coulombs) neutral.
But it gets still worse sometimes. A colleague of mine resigned after naked and compromised pics emerged. They were a dozen years old, and unmistakably her. Yes, she's married with three children and doing a great job professionally, but she couldn't stand the thought of people mentally undressing her all the time.
The PHB knew she did porn at one time; she had told him about it. She needed the money, then graduated, got a post grad degree, and distanced herself from her 'former' life.
To no avail.
Uh, no, the GPL isn't a copyright license, it's a procedural use of code that may or may not otherwise be bound by copyright. The 'open' side of the license, should a coder be bound by it, doesn't nullify copyright, and never did. It's a usage license that defines the procedure under which the code can subsequently be used, how modifications are treated, and says how the use of the code binds one to the obligations of the license.
This simply isn't true. The choices have been there for a long time. Palm could have used something else. They didn't. They could have also complied with the GPL license, and no sweat, no harm, no fowl. They didn't, it appears.
Uh, no.
The terms are really simple here, and the violation is obvious. If you distribute mods, you must distribute code. No evidence of code out there.... and the app doesn't exist in a vacuum. The argument really isn't legitimate. If fact, it's quite clear what the problem is: violation.
One step at a time. You won't get a uniform behavior code out of the bribed (oops, campaign-contributed/heavily lobbied) congress, so heavy breathing down their neck is at least a start.
The threat of litigation doesn't mean as much as it used to. It costs the gov the same $$ go send lawyers, do depositions, get into discovery, try and settle, then go to trial as it does the plaintiff (Verizon in this case).
That said, at least Obama's regime is doing something visible about outrageous telco behavior. The prior regime would have done a thumbs-up to Verizon.
NPR's CPB funding wasn't seriously jeapordized. You may recall that the Kroc foundation gave them a huge sum of money, and their endowment's been reasonably steady-- although they'll always need money.
Uncritical reporting doesn't get hits. And page views != quality. There needs to be another metric that helps vet sources of real reporting, rather than those that are only thinly venered opinion without fact checking. Then someone needs to keep score about who was BS and who was real.... after the fact.
The problem is that we only measure quantity, not quality in information disemination.
They have too much IP at stake to EVER be on the right side of software patents. In your wildest dreams, sadly.
There is likely no such thing as private, even if marked. Encryption probably raises even more flags.
Me and 350M others. They can watch all they want. Add in twitter, myspace, linked-in, and every other gawdforsaken social network. Hey, we do it-- why not them? When they start poking into private space, and none of the aforementioned have a reasonable expectation of privacy as they're public places, then I'll get testy. Until then, I hope they don't waste too much taxpayer money on it.
Who knows? Tablet vaporstuff is in vogue... even Barnes and Noble can't ship one. Bezos is selling 'em like hot cakes.
I think the patent on paper has expired.YMMV.
Lending further suspicion to the whole matter....
On the other hand, let's see what Fusion Garage ships. Might be ok. Too bad Arrington gets cut out of the deal. You'd think a lawyer would have better smarts about these things.
Oh, wait....