As a musician, I wish I had more background in formant research but I digress. Singing does not *entirely* match the frequencies and thus formants of people talking, and music doesn't necessarily match the formants of people singing. Meanwhile, frequency range vs true functionality/accurate reproduction of audio on even the highest end models of hearing aids from today's companies are fairly poor and tend to handle a very limited range of frequencies (by design). This is a problem. Whether it's BTE, ITC, it doesn't matter. if CI's are even worse then I can't even imagine how bad it is to someone sensitive to hearing loss. I understand the benefit - surely providing hearing is a significant benefit, but yeah.
Music designed hearing aids? I had looked at them a long while ago, but I suppose if it has changed in the last 5-10 years there may be more out there than I know. I had forgotten about that. I suppose I am behind the times, so off to google I go:P
It's not that audio researchers are lazy - to them we owe many things and deserve proper respect, my focus is more of the companies providing the aids. Example: sonus, miracle ear (to directly name those which I've had such experiences). Lazy is not accurate. I suppose "not doing a good job" is more accurate, even when factoring technological limitations. I agree it doesn't invalidate where we've gotten thus far. Plus at the end of the day people aren't relying on audiologists with such companies, they end up relying on people who are not as qualified, so any excellent hearing aid (as designed) can be nullified entirely by the experience of the audio companies themselves.
re: Beethoven, I'm not sure if I had explained well, I suppose. Composition doesn't necessarily require being able to hear. I'm saying his ability to *conduct* and *perform* (aka his musical skills) went to shit when his hearing did. Composition skill is not explicitly music (performance) skill, it's more along the lines of writing or arithmetic.
I don't get how this even applies? The judge didn't even rule on $1B from samsung, which wasn't even awarded. The only direction apple's heading towards earning is zero, or less than what it stands at now - assuming that even sticks. While the premise (losing out on class action) sucks, it and simply being the same judge has no relation to anything involving the samsung vs apple case, of which apparently the submitter can't even get information right.
Not only that, but what exactly is a "Ruling class" and how are judges magically the only part of it? And how does this even apply to donations? Everyone is in the ruling class, because we all (in America) live ruled by a government that we elect. Granted there's a lot of bullshit , a lot of vested interests and a lot of hostility towards the average citizen, but every person is part of the "ruling class" aside from those unable to vote.
Your post is so nonsequitur that it's just that much more awful in it's general trolling/inaccuracies.
toxic based on what? People just don't like things they perceive as complicated. For years we've said that was linux. However, user activity proves that while people say linux has a stigma, their actions show that they don't believe that even remotely.
how many linux- based devices are in use right now? like 80% of all technology? 90%? every appliance?
People can be afraid of linux all they want, but they're clearly using it anyway.
it would start with there being an actual linux stigma, which is something that doesn't even exist in the first place. People just don't like things they don't undestand.
I agree with you on some points. Hearing aids are definitely an improvement over not, but the problem is that hearing aids are designed and focus on "people talking" which ignores:
people singing music anything outside the normal range of people talking, which includes pitches people talk at when they're speaking softly. frequencies which you may be basically deaf for regardless of hearing aids because they just don't amplify them.
So they're really not "hearing aids" in the broad sense of the phrase which is what people expect (helping you hear everything), they're hearing aids designed to help you hear people speak. Which is fine for that purpose, but sucks for everything else. It also means they put in really lazy effort into them, trying to do noise cancelling to make speech easier to hear but simultaneously cancelling the sound of....speech.
Beethoven's music had nothing to do with his hearing, in fact when his hearing went down his musical skills went to shit along with it. Please don't let people mention Beethoven, he was a classical composer who then lost his hearing and yet is remembered for it.
It's almost as if there's an enormous amount of the population between the super rich and the poor. It might even be an important group. Maybe the middle class or something?
This is how they say it every time, unfortunately. Just like how every medical breakthrough is a cure for cancer, etc etc. "we'll restore your hearing!" "you'll hear perfectly!"
the reality: not so much. Many brands (and audiologists) are terrible at helping people hear.
I'm happy to see this move forward, but this solution doesn't sound as rosy as is proclaimed.
your blog doesn't give me the impression that they are great. Not to mention it seems like it'll look like you have grey pads attached to your skull, roughly?
Audio does not sound as good as it did before the implants. I deleted about 2/3 of all my favorite mp3 songs. They were just not enjoyable anymore... Listening to music on TV is not as good either - so watching American Idol and XFactor is not the same now. These processors can only process sounds to something like 300 Hz (don't quote me on that), but a cello is something like 65 Hz. So I don't hear cello in music."
I'm a cellist, so that means your idea of implants is explicitly a no for me.
expecting freedom of choice and not tolerating people taking one away isn't fundamentalism. It's called not being ignorant. If you think that's islamic fundamentalism, you should look in the mirror.
Absolutely and entirely incorrect. The quality of the applications has no correlation whatsoever to whether or not there is a fee associated with access. That argument has been debunked a million times.
Meanwhile, there's a reason F/OSS exists, and it is to run exactly counter to this issue. How apple can get away with these restrictions is literally the summation of the problems with Apple.
which is explicitly and entirely unacceptable. You should not need a developer license (permission from apple) to do anything on your iDevice. That is exactly the problem.
This is true. The loss to the global economy (or more specifically, USA & Mexico) from an additional 70k people dead is a lot more money than what is gained from the DEA by having jobs parading around arresting people for drug use.
You are incredibly biased and either accidentally or intentionally missing both a: facts and b: cognitive arguments being made by everyone else. Were you a sun developer or something?
"not being a jerk" doesn't exist. That's not a law, and it never can and never will be. Do you realize how subjective those kind of statements are and why they do not have any legal standing or otherwise? If google was really "being a jerk", the community would revolt. Have they? I've yet to see an actual developer community go "google sucks" that wasn't MS based.
This is exactly what they said in court, and the facts backed it. It amazes me people think Oracle should be defended here and don't understand the implications of if Oracle's view was supported by the courts.
gov't printing money is not a metaphor. gov't prints money daily, to replace old money. They also print money at times to deal with inflation.
If the US switched to bitcoins, an enormous amount of things would change, immediately. Among other things you would see the entire country destabilize quickly.
not really, it's more the fact that the GPL can prevent you from forking someone's work in a way that makes it proprietary.
Apache and BSD do not share such wordings in their license. It's an issue of control: either you can force the fact that you can't take away other people's control like GPL does, or you can say "I leave it out there for the world to benefit" but turn a blind eye to the fact that people can and do manipulate your work to their own benefit (and detriment of everyone else).
That's not to say that either of them are a perfect solution - as dkf points out rightfully they aren't. However, I'd at least throw my cards in "You can't screw up my work that I put out there for the world to take advantage of" versus "here's my work everyone, do whatever you want!" and when someone makes a change to the project that everyone likes and then makes it private, everyone loses their access. It's a matter of trust. Do you trust the public to always have good intentions? It's not a question of your own intentions, but a matter of the public's. I sure as hell don't.
beyond humor, the current roku setup is exactly like above posts had mentioned:
--------------
that is your menu. you scroll left to right, and that's it. It functions and you can rearrange things, but roku is really set up like that.
Thankfully Plex on roku has a better interface than roku, I suppose you can call it a 2 dimension interface as you have horizontal and vertical aspects, better arranged.I would never even use a roku if it wasn't for plex.
I don't think you understand the implication of what I'm saying. Why should you for example:
have to agree to a EULA which requires the software distributor to be able to sell your information, in order to use their service? Are you going to tell me that you somehow can't run the service without that EULA? What if it's a paid service?
because people love to make it sound like GPL is terrible when it's not. Specifically people who are: pro apple, pro microsoft, or anti google. The rest of the world understands GPL and why it's great and takes advantage of it every day.
Slashdot Mirror
As a musician, I wish I had more background in formant research but I digress. Singing does not *entirely* match the frequencies and thus formants of people talking, and music doesn't necessarily match the formants of people singing. Meanwhile, frequency range vs true functionality/accurate reproduction of audio on even the highest end models of hearing aids from today's companies are fairly poor and tend to handle a very limited range of frequencies (by design). This is a problem. Whether it's BTE, ITC, it doesn't matter. if CI's are even worse then I can't even imagine how bad it is to someone sensitive to hearing loss. I understand the benefit - surely providing hearing is a significant benefit, but yeah.
Music designed hearing aids? I had looked at them a long while ago, but I suppose if it has changed in the last 5-10 years there may be more out there than I know. I had forgotten about that. I suppose I am behind the times, so off to google I go :P
It's not that audio researchers are lazy - to them we owe many things and deserve proper respect, my focus is more of the companies providing the aids. Example: sonus, miracle ear (to directly name those which I've had such experiences). Lazy is not accurate. I suppose "not doing a good job" is more accurate, even when factoring technological limitations. I agree it doesn't invalidate where we've gotten thus far. Plus at the end of the day people aren't relying on audiologists with such companies, they end up relying on people who are not as qualified, so any excellent hearing aid (as designed) can be nullified entirely by the experience of the audio companies themselves.
re: Beethoven, I'm not sure if I had explained well, I suppose. Composition doesn't necessarily require being able to hear. I'm saying his ability to *conduct* and *perform* (aka his musical skills) went to shit when his hearing did. Composition skill is not explicitly music (performance) skill, it's more along the lines of writing or arithmetic.
I don't get how this even applies? The judge didn't even rule on $1B from samsung, which wasn't even awarded. The only direction apple's heading towards earning is zero, or less than what it stands at now - assuming that even sticks. While the premise (losing out on class action) sucks, it and simply being the same judge has no relation to anything involving the samsung vs apple case, of which apparently the submitter can't even get information right.
Not only that, but what exactly is a "Ruling class" and how are judges magically the only part of it? And how does this even apply to donations? Everyone is in the ruling class, because we all (in America) live ruled by a government that we elect. Granted there's a lot of bullshit , a lot of vested interests and a lot of hostility towards the average citizen, but every person is part of the "ruling class" aside from those unable to vote.
Your post is so nonsequitur that it's just that much more awful in it's general trolling/inaccuracies.
toxic based on what? People just don't like things they perceive as complicated. For years we've said that was linux. However, user activity proves that while people say linux has a stigma, their actions show that they don't believe that even remotely.
how many linux- based devices are in use right now? like 80% of all technology? 90%? every appliance?
People can be afraid of linux all they want, but they're clearly using it anyway.
it would start with there being an actual linux stigma, which is something that doesn't even exist in the first place. People just don't like things they don't undestand.
I agree with you on some points. Hearing aids are definitely an improvement over not, but the problem is that hearing aids are designed and focus on "people talking" which ignores:
people singing
music
anything outside the normal range of people talking, which includes pitches people talk at when they're speaking softly.
frequencies which you may be basically deaf for regardless of hearing aids because they just don't amplify them.
So they're really not "hearing aids" in the broad sense of the phrase which is what people expect (helping you hear everything), they're hearing aids designed to help you hear people speak. Which is fine for that purpose, but sucks for everything else. It also means they put in really lazy effort into them, trying to do noise cancelling to make speech easier to hear but simultaneously cancelling the sound of....speech.
Beethoven's music had nothing to do with his hearing, in fact when his hearing went down his musical skills went to shit along with it. Please don't let people mention Beethoven, he was a classical composer who then lost his hearing and yet is remembered for it.
It's almost as if there's an enormous amount of the population between the super rich and the poor. It might even be an important group. Maybe the middle class or something?
This is how they say it every time, unfortunately. Just like how every medical breakthrough is a cure for cancer, etc etc. "we'll restore your hearing!" "you'll hear perfectly!"
the reality: not so much. Many brands (and audiologists) are terrible at helping people hear.
I'm happy to see this move forward, but this solution doesn't sound as rosy as is proclaimed.
your blog doesn't give me the impression that they are great. Not to mention it seems like it'll look like you have grey pads attached to your skull, roughly?
I'm a cellist, so that means your idea of implants is explicitly a no for me.
we're near a thin rock? what? whaaaat?
how or why is RMS a douchebag? For being a: correct and b: not stupid?
go troll someone else.
expecting freedom of choice and not tolerating people taking one away isn't fundamentalism. It's called not being ignorant. If you think that's islamic fundamentalism, you should look in the mirror.
I'm enforcing my desires on people? yeah, sure, that must be it. It's not like Stallman has anything to say about the matter, right?
It's not about what I like or don't like, or my preferences. This is what's called you being an ad hominem lazy troll, Basil.
Absolutely and entirely incorrect. The quality of the applications has no correlation whatsoever to whether or not there is a fee associated with access. That argument has been debunked a million times.
Meanwhile, there's a reason F/OSS exists, and it is to run exactly counter to this issue. How apple can get away with these restrictions is literally the summation of the problems with Apple.
which is explicitly and entirely unacceptable. You should not need a developer license (permission from apple) to do anything on your iDevice. That is exactly the problem.
the Ipad is an extension of apple's methods, so you don't get one without the other.
This is true. The loss to the global economy (or more specifically, USA & Mexico) from an additional 70k people dead is a lot more money than what is gained from the DEA by having jobs parading around arresting people for drug use.
Huh? the off you are referring to is sleep mode. People do understand the difference between "Screen is not on" and "phone is off".
Uh, sun praised google for the creation of android. You know that, right? http://theblitzbit.com/2011/07/26/sun-ceo-praises-android-take-that-oracle/ . Anything following Oracle's acquisition at that point is entirely moot. Note the date, as well.
You are incredibly biased and either accidentally or intentionally missing both a: facts and b: cognitive arguments being made by everyone else. Were you a sun developer or something?
"not being a jerk" doesn't exist. That's not a law, and it never can and never will be. Do you realize how subjective those kind of statements are and why they do not have any legal standing or otherwise? If google was really "being a jerk", the community would revolt. Have they? I've yet to see an actual developer community go "google sucks" that wasn't MS based.
This is exactly what they said in court, and the facts backed it. It amazes me people think Oracle should be defended here and don't understand the implications of if Oracle's view was supported by the courts.
gov't printing money is not a metaphor. gov't prints money daily, to replace old money. They also print money at times to deal with inflation.
If the US switched to bitcoins, an enormous amount of things would change, immediately. Among other things you would see the entire country destabilize quickly.
not really, it's more the fact that the GPL can prevent you from forking someone's work in a way that makes it proprietary.
Apache and BSD do not share such wordings in their license. It's an issue of control: either you can force the fact that you can't take away other people's control like GPL does, or you can say "I leave it out there for the world to benefit" but turn a blind eye to the fact that people can and do manipulate your work to their own benefit (and detriment of everyone else).
That's not to say that either of them are a perfect solution - as dkf points out rightfully they aren't. However, I'd at least throw my cards in "You can't screw up my work that I put out there for the world to take advantage of" versus "here's my work everyone, do whatever you want!" and when someone makes a change to the project that everyone likes and then makes it private, everyone loses their access. It's a matter of trust. Do you trust the public to always have good intentions? It's not a question of your own intentions, but a matter of the public's. I sure as hell don't.
beyond humor, the current roku setup is exactly like above posts had mentioned:
--------------
that is your menu. you scroll left to right, and that's it. It functions and you can rearrange things, but roku is really set up like that.
Thankfully Plex on roku has a better interface than roku, I suppose you can call it a 2 dimension interface as you have horizontal and vertical aspects, better arranged.I would never even use a roku if it wasn't for plex.
I don't think you understand the implication of what I'm saying. Why should you for example:
have to agree to a EULA which requires the software distributor to be able to sell your information, in order to use their service? Are you going to tell me that you somehow can't run the service without that EULA? What if it's a paid service?
because people love to make it sound like GPL is terrible when it's not. Specifically people who are: pro apple, pro microsoft, or anti google. The rest of the world understands GPL and why it's great and takes advantage of it every day.