The $700K average + taxes for a modest house in Vancouver BC pays for a lot of garbage pickup. The roads are substantially the same as they were 40 years ago. It takes me 35 to 45 minutes each way the 35 blocks to work, about the same speed as walking a yak. The water supply becomes undrinkable for weeks on end after a torrential downpour. I never see a cop on the road unless it's another 'zero tolerance' ticketfest or in papers over another scandal. I've seen seven doctors over eight months for a minor ear infection and am no further towards being cured than in the Spring. Honestly, I think you're splitting hairs.
"The recording quality is the last thing we care about when listening to a song."
I suggest you best care and rise about an 'us vs. them' view of the issue. In the last few years production practices have sewered and recordings are becoming actively unpleasant. I work in the radio industry and some are so distorted it's hard to differentiate from equipment issues. Other than a Celtic Frost cover band I don't see how this serves anyone's musical vision.
The parent wasn't perpetrating a myth, you're confusing 'copying' with 'recording'. The topic is the former. Once committed to a format copies can be 'lossless' - the original recoverable bit for bit - or lossy for reduced file size. The parent correctly notes the valid 3rd option of bit-for-bit accurate copies packed smaller than the original.
Analogue recording is 'bit lossy' if you want to be 100% accurate about it. Tape is limited to the size of the magnetic domains on the backing, a function of particle size. If you really want to be finicky, sound travelling in air is 'digital' in that the carrier is discrete oxygen/nitrogen molecules and not a continuous 'ether' from source to ear. More finely grained than any conceivable recording media at this point mind you, but still 'digital'.
The local comp-emporium had Vista running on a display machine. I had the opportunity to play with it a bit while waiting for my vid card. You were wise to qualify that statement with 'if' because if Vista is revolutionary it has more to do with DRM and vendor lock-in than anything important to the user. The bizarre combination of extremely polished details, a grotesque theme and features which screamed 'my blush with Enlightenment' made for a textbook example of committee-think in action. If a Public Enemy bling-sized clock and stolen elemenets of Karumba constitute 'revolution' in Redmond these days the end times are thankfully near.
I think what often ticks off people with this perspective is technically-capable managers are harder to dupe. Yes, I'm a manager of a technical group and I usually hear the micromanagement complaint when investigating why simple tasks take four time longer than I'm capable of doing myself. My expectations are a staff who better my work and do it faster than I can with skills dulled by years of deskwork. Those who meet that metric and call me on it are my successes, those who whine about micromanagement eat up a lot more of my damn time.
"We Canadians don't tend to get so worked up about individual freedoms when the common good is at stake."
What? Since you're so in favour of it, please exercise a little self-censorship here or at the very least make it clear you speak only for yourself and not Canada. I know no other Canadians who are pro-corporate run censorship. The irony is I found this a particularly American approach, using outside government entities to apply remedies outside the government's powers. Make no mistake, the major ISPs like Rogers , Bell and Chorus all have large broadcast media wings heavily reliant on the CRTC's favourable rulings for survival. The CRTC will use this to force ISPs into become their contract censors. You may be the only of we Canadians who think this is grand. My guess: old regime Ottawa Liberal?
You don't seem to realize the Wiki article contradicts your assertion. The cause of cooling period to which it refers is described in the article as solar output and volcanic activity, an atmospheric phenomena. Agreeing volcanic ash can alter the global climate is a long way from debunking the effects of CO2. Take a look at the last graph from the bottom. The jump in temperature during the previous century exceeds in height anything before it with no sign of abating.
Nor do you appear to have noticed the mini ice age of Point 1 is local to Western Europe and a projected consequence of global warming's effect on ocean currents.
No need to hypothesis about Point 3 either, the potential consequences on ocean life from global warming have been studied and debated ad nauseum and don't generally take your view. Though record largemouth being pulled out of Canadian lakes has a certain appeal.
You seem to have forgotten the part the judge didn't, or shifted it elsewhere: burden of proof. If the RIAA can demonstrate the majority of defendants download with intent to sell CDs, they have a strong case. Since it's ludicuous at face value though so is $750.
As you wish. The article cites one on PassportsPlease.org, a direct link from that article is to the World Privacy Forum's submitted objection to the change:
"The Identity Project submits these comments in response to the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) published at 71 Federal Register 40035-40048 (July 14, 2006), docket number USCBP20050003-0003, and the associated Regulatory Assessment published July 18, 2006 on the Web site at and docketed as USCBP-2005-0003-0005. In the guise of an NPRM alleged to propose a change only in the required timing of transmission of information already required to be provided to the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection (CBP), the CBP has actually proposed a fundamental regulatory change with far-reaching (literally and figuratively) legal, policy, and logistical implications: The NPRM would replace a requirement for ex post facto notice to the CBP of information about who is on each vessel (ship or plane) with an unconstitutional system of prior restraint of international travel, entirely unauthorized by statute and inconsistent with the U.S. obligations embodied in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Under the proposed rules, orders by the CBP to common carriers not to transport specific persons would not be based on restraining orders (injunctions) issued by competent judicial authorities. Instead, they would be based on an undefined, secret, administrative permission-to-travel (clearance) procedure subject to none of the procedural or substantive due process required for orders prohibiting or restricting the exercise of protected First Amendment rights. From the authority of law enforcement officers and agencies to enforce certain types of orders, once lawfully issued by competent judicial authorities, the NPRM would usurp for the CBP the authority to issue those orders on its own. Its as though the FBI were to construe its authority to maintain in the NCIC a list of persons for whose arrest warrants have been issued by competent judicial authorities, and execute those warrants, as authority for the FBI to issue and execute its own warrantless administrative arrest orders."
As an adult, one apparently too lazy to click through a couple of cites, I expect you're capable of reading and understanding the gist of the objection. To help you along, it's another instance of killing democratic freedoms via deft and surgical manipulation of archane regulations. A bit like 'enemy combatant' writ small.
"I actually am a constitutional scholar."....."I must've been a horrible person in my last life, 'cause I came back as a guy on the help desk."
I think it's tremendous your country is willing to fund a help desk to resolve Constitutional dilemmas. That degree of faith in civic duty is becoming increasingly rare. =D
"By default we're allowed to do whatever we want."
I don't believe that's entirely correct and the distinction is vital. No one allows citizen actions, the government restricts certain actions based on consensus of the common good. It's a difference as distinct as that between 'masters' and 'public servants', or a 'piece of god damned paper' and a living Constitution.
I would have phrased that: "I am not really disturbed at how far companies are willing to go to pressure America to change their laws to protect corporate interests, that's what companies do. What disturbs me is that our current government thinks that *this* interest is worth so much diplomatic capital."
Now now, don't be too hard on HD Radio. It has significant upsides. The broadcast equipment manufacturers at the recent National Association of Broadcasters convention in Vegas last April were near hopping in the isles like sugared children in anticipation. One exciting discovery about HD, those sidebands have immense peak power. Using a 12,000 watt transmitter to broadcast FM today? You'll need a 20,000 watt to add HD, step right up! Links between studios and transmitters, licensing fees, transmit antenna upgrades (pity the poor AM broadcasters, who'll be on the hook for real money), HD will be a huge boost to a niche electronics market for the next decade. Good times.
You'll hear the difference. HD sounds worse. Not as bad as satellite but bad enough. Originally HD was about freeing up the FM band for other uses. It was meant to broadcast elsewhere, like DAB. The big broadcasters revolted, no one wanted to risk their market postions in a wholesale band swap. That's why HD is an in-band format, broadcast as 'noise' beneath the main FM signal, and why analogue FM will continue to be broadcast. HD no longer opens up a band and will not sound better than FM. Today it's about getting more free licenses in the same space, not about the end listener experience at all.
"So, on an HD Radio station that is not serving up any subchannels, the sound quality can easily blow away satellite."
Faint praise. In a world in which most music lovers listen to low or no compression audio through decent electronics, we in the radio industry are rushing to provide an sonic experience I avoid on-line. As an industry we're slitting our own throats, and doing it for no other reason than the ability to program more channels of generice tripe in dramatically lower audio quality within the same licensed bandwidth. "Heeeeey, don't like our product now? Don't buy yet, for the same money we'll lower our quality and throw in Two, yes Two more channels of inane shit for free!" How will the audience resist?
Re:Where are the bunkers to protect Citizens ?
on
Back to the Bunker
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
This takes it a step further though. The implications of the following:
"Moreover, since 9/11 and Hurricane Katrina, the definition of what constitutes an "essential" government function has been expanded so ridiculously beyond core national security functions -- do we really need patent and trademark processing in the middle of a nuclear holocaust?...."
are horrific. Placing government officials above citizens is old news and expected, planning (presumably) to enforce who has the right to print 'Coke' on a can or copy a CD under terrorist nuclear attack moves the government into territories until now the sole domain of Dali or Escher. It's yet another example of how corporate lobbying have twisted and distorted government.
"As long as there are controls to make sure they don't take it too far..."
Great idea. And let's keep the government doing the censoring in charge of the controls as well. While we're at it, make the Administrative branch responsible for pushing these laws and appointing the Legislative gatekeepers who determine if it's constitutional. It's worked so damn well up to now, that is once those gatekeepers decide if it's in the Admin's powers to spy on any American citizen they want, whenever they want without oversight.
BTW, you wrote 'liberal' but I'm pretty sure the concept you were grasping for is 'pre-Enlightenment'. The position you advocate is after all closer to monarchy than democratic republic.
Slashdot Mirror
The $700K average + taxes for a modest house in Vancouver BC pays for a lot of garbage pickup. The roads are substantially the same as they were 40 years ago. It takes me 35 to 45 minutes each way the 35 blocks to work, about the same speed as walking a yak. The water supply becomes undrinkable for weeks on end after a torrential downpour. I never see a cop on the road unless it's another 'zero tolerance' ticketfest or in papers over another scandal. I've seen seven doctors over eight months for a minor ear infection and am no further towards being cured than in the Spring. Honestly, I think you're splitting hairs.
"The recording quality is the last thing we care about when listening to a song."
I suggest you best care and rise about an 'us vs. them' view of the issue. In the last few years production practices have sewered and recordings are becoming actively unpleasant. I work in the radio industry and some are so distorted it's hard to differentiate from equipment issues. Other than a Celtic Frost cover band I don't see how this serves anyone's musical vision.
The parent wasn't perpetrating a myth, you're confusing 'copying' with 'recording'. The topic is the former. Once committed to a format copies can be 'lossless' - the original recoverable bit for bit - or lossy for reduced file size. The parent correctly notes the valid 3rd option of bit-for-bit accurate copies packed smaller than the original.
Analogue recording is 'bit lossy' if you want to be 100% accurate about it. Tape is limited to the size of the magnetic domains on the backing, a function of particle size. If you really want to be finicky, sound travelling in air is 'digital' in that the carrier is discrete oxygen/nitrogen molecules and not a continuous 'ether' from source to ear. More finely grained than any conceivable recording media at this point mind you, but still 'digital'.
The local comp-emporium had Vista running on a display machine. I had the opportunity to play with it a bit while waiting for my vid card. You were wise to qualify that statement with 'if' because if Vista is revolutionary it has more to do with DRM and vendor lock-in than anything important to the user. The bizarre combination of extremely polished details, a grotesque theme and features which screamed 'my blush with Enlightenment' made for a textbook example of committee-think in action. If a Public Enemy bling-sized clock and stolen elemenets of Karumba constitute 'revolution' in Redmond these days the end times are thankfully near.
Ya oh ya? Well we have Carly Fiorina.
I think what often ticks off people with this perspective is technically-capable managers are harder to dupe. Yes, I'm a manager of a technical group and I usually hear the micromanagement complaint when investigating why simple tasks take four time longer than I'm capable of doing myself. My expectations are a staff who better my work and do it faster than I can with skills dulled by years of deskwork. Those who meet that metric and call me on it are my successes, those who whine about micromanagement eat up a lot more of my damn time.
"We Canadians don't tend to get so worked up about individual freedoms when the common good is at stake."
What? Since you're so in favour of it, please exercise a little self-censorship here or at the very least make it clear you speak only for yourself and not Canada. I know no other Canadians who are pro-corporate run censorship. The irony is I found this a particularly American approach, using outside government entities to apply remedies outside the government's powers. Make no mistake, the major ISPs like Rogers , Bell and Chorus all have large broadcast media wings heavily reliant on the CRTC's favourable rulings for survival. The CRTC will use this to force ISPs into become their contract censors. You may be the only of we Canadians who think this is grand.
My guess: old regime Ottawa Liberal?
You don't seem to realize the Wiki article contradicts your assertion. The cause of cooling period to which it refers is described in the article as solar output and volcanic activity, an atmospheric phenomena. Agreeing volcanic ash can alter the global climate is a long way from debunking the effects of CO2. Take a look at the last graph from the bottom. The jump in temperature during the previous century exceeds in height anything before it with no sign of abating.
Nor do you appear to have noticed the mini ice age of Point 1 is local to Western Europe and a projected consequence of global warming's effect on ocean currents.
No need to hypothesis about Point 3 either, the potential consequences on ocean life from global warming have been studied and debated ad nauseum and don't generally take your view. Though record largemouth being pulled out of Canadian lakes has a certain appeal.
You seem to have forgotten the part the judge didn't, or shifted it elsewhere: burden of proof. If the RIAA can demonstrate the majority of defendants download with intent to sell CDs, they have a strong case. Since it's ludicuous at face value though so is $750.
"Come on, slashdot. Treat us like adults."
As you wish. The article cites one on PassportsPlease.org, a direct link from that article is to the World Privacy Forum's submitted objection to the change:
"The Identity Project submits these comments in response to the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
(NPRM) published at 71 Federal Register 40035-40048 (July 14, 2006), docket number
USCBP20050003-0003, and the associated Regulatory Assessment published July 18, 2006 on the
Web site at and docketed as USCBP-2005-0003-0005.
In the guise of an NPRM alleged to propose a change only in the required timing of transmission
of information already required to be provided to the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection (CBP),
the CBP has actually proposed a fundamental regulatory change with far-reaching (literally and
figuratively) legal, policy, and logistical implications: The NPRM would replace a requirement for ex
post facto notice to the CBP of information about who is on each vessel (ship or plane) with an
unconstitutional system of prior restraint of international travel, entirely unauthorized by statute and
inconsistent with the U.S. obligations embodied in the International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights.
Under the proposed rules, orders by the CBP to common carriers not to transport specific persons
would not be based on restraining orders (injunctions) issued by competent judicial authorities. Instead,
they would be based on an undefined, secret, administrative permission-to-travel (clearance) procedure
subject to none of the procedural or substantive due process required for orders prohibiting or restricting
the exercise of protected First Amendment rights. From the authority of law enforcement officers and
agencies to enforce certain types of orders, once lawfully issued by competent judicial authorities, the
NPRM would usurp for the CBP the authority to issue those orders on its own. Its as though the FBI
were to construe its authority to maintain in the NCIC a list of persons for whose arrest warrants have
been issued by competent judicial authorities, and execute those warrants, as authority for the FBI to
issue and execute its own warrantless administrative arrest orders."
As an adult, one apparently too lazy to click through a couple of cites, I expect you're capable of reading and understanding the gist of the objection. To help you along, it's another instance of killing democratic freedoms via deft and surgical manipulation of archane regulations. A bit like 'enemy combatant' writ small.
"I actually am a constitutional scholar."....."I must've been a horrible person in my last life, 'cause I came back as a guy on the help desk."
I think it's tremendous your country is willing to fund a help desk to resolve Constitutional dilemmas. That degree of faith in civic duty is becoming increasingly rare. =D
"By default we're allowed to do whatever we want."
I don't believe that's entirely correct and the distinction is vital. No one allows citizen actions, the government restricts certain actions based on consensus of the common good. It's a difference as distinct as that between 'masters' and 'public servants', or a 'piece of god damned paper' and a living Constitution.
Microsoft had a 2005 gross earning approximately 1/9 that of ExxonMobil. Not chickenfeed but not comparable either.
Don't forget John Fogerty being sued for sounding too much like John Fogerty (The Old Man Down The Road vs. Run Through The Jungle.)
I would have phrased that: "I am not really disturbed at how far companies are willing to go to pressure America to change their laws to protect corporate interests, that's what companies do. What disturbs me is that our current government thinks that *this* interest is worth so much diplomatic capital."
Now now, don't be too hard on HD Radio. It has significant upsides. The broadcast equipment manufacturers at the recent National Association of Broadcasters convention in Vegas last April were near hopping in the isles like sugared children in anticipation. One exciting discovery about HD, those sidebands have immense peak power. Using a 12,000 watt transmitter to broadcast FM today? You'll need a 20,000 watt to add HD, step right up! Links between studios and transmitters, licensing fees, transmit antenna upgrades (pity the poor AM broadcasters, who'll be on the hook for real money), HD will be a huge boost to a niche electronics market for the next decade. Good times.
Big difference, HD radio is federally mandated. Nothing ensures listenership like a government dictate.
You'll hear the difference. HD sounds worse. Not as bad as satellite but bad enough. Originally HD was about freeing up the FM band for other uses. It was meant to broadcast elsewhere, like DAB. The big broadcasters revolted, no one wanted to risk their market postions in a wholesale band swap. That's why HD is an in-band format, broadcast as 'noise' beneath the main FM signal, and why analogue FM will continue to be broadcast. HD no longer opens up a band and will not sound better than FM. Today it's about getting more free licenses in the same space, not about the end listener experience at all.
Faint praise. In a world in which most music lovers listen to low or no compression audio through decent electronics, we in the radio industry are rushing to provide an sonic experience I avoid on-line. As an industry we're slitting our own throats, and doing it for no other reason than the ability to program more channels of generice tripe in dramatically lower audio quality within the same licensed bandwidth. "Heeeeey, don't like our product now? Don't buy yet, for the same money we'll lower our quality and throw in Two, yes Two more channels of inane shit for free!" How will the audience resist?
"Moreover, since 9/11 and Hurricane Katrina, the definition of what constitutes an "essential" government function has been expanded so ridiculously beyond core national security functions -- do we really need patent and trademark processing in the middle of a nuclear holocaust?...."
are horrific. Placing government officials above citizens is old news and expected, planning (presumably) to enforce who has the right to print 'Coke' on a can or copy a CD under terrorist nuclear attack moves the government into territories until now the sole domain of Dali or Escher. It's yet another example of how corporate lobbying have twisted and distorted government.
I thought it was 'enemy combatant'.
But still long before it was implemented. :)
Great idea. And let's keep the government doing the censoring in charge of the controls as well. While we're at it, make the Administrative branch responsible for pushing these laws and appointing the Legislative gatekeepers who determine if it's constitutional. It's worked so damn well up to now, that is once those gatekeepers decide if it's in the Admin's powers to spy on any American citizen they want, whenever they want without oversight.
BTW, you wrote 'liberal' but I'm pretty sure the concept you were grasping for is 'pre-Enlightenment'. The position you advocate is after all closer to monarchy than democratic republic.
Good idea. Let's test it on the families of politicians first. They believe most strongly in the concept.