I didn't say they don't break. Did you read my post?
I said that saying that Logitech steering wheels have more sturdy pedals isn't a valid point. A bass drum pedal needs to be shaped like a bass drum pedal, and that's going to make it less sturdy than a brake pedal.
RockBand pedals can be stamped on too. I've had mine since it came out and the bass drum pedal hasn't broken yet.
I do agree I've had more sturdy pedals on even cheap wheels. But that's because bass drum pedals (like car pedals) are supposed to be a certain shape, and that shape is inherently less sturdy than a brake pedal.
Alaskans get $1.85 back for every $1.00 they pay to the Federal Gov't.
So Ted Stevens played a huge role in developing Alaska on my dime. I don't need to laud him for that.
What was wrong with the Alaskan statehood compact? From what I can tell, the Federal government purchased Alaska from Russian. Then turns some of the land over to the state of Alaska? And Alaska gets to charge severance tax on oil taken up there?
No, you are almost guaranteed to get a shot with thimerosal because most flu shots are multi-dose. Since they guess as to the strain that will be prevalent, they generally make shots that protect against several strains at once.
In addition to mercury, these shots also have aluminum and formaldehyde. Mercury and Aluminum are neurological poisons-they accumulate in the brain. Formaldehyde is a known carcinogen and is used to embalm the dead. There is no safe level of formaldehyde established for injection into a living organism.
Multi-dose doesn't mean it has inoculations against multiple strains. It means that the same liquid in a single vial is used to inject multiple people. A larger vial is used and several people get shots from it. This reduces costs. In the US, they are more concerned about getting sued if you catch something that could be traced to a contaminated vial than the cost of the vial, so they use single-dose vials where one person gets a shot from it and then the vial is thrown away. Thimerosal is not used in these vials.
The 0s are single-dose preparations. For example Fluarix "FLUARIX is supplied as a 0.5 mL dose in a prefilled syringe." These are what is used in the US.
Are you sure you know what you are talking about?
In addition to mercury, these shots also have aluminum and formaldehyde. Mercury and Aluminum are neurological poisons-they accumulate in the brain. Formaldehyde is a known carcinogen and is used to embalm the dead. There is no safe level of formaldehyde established for injection into a living organism.
Formaldehyde is used to prepare the deactivated viruses used in the shot. It is not part of the final shot (of course there could be trace amounts).
There's no aluminum used in flu shots either it seems.
You might want to look into the idea of not spreading false info.
Since I have never had the flu (in the past 10 years anyway) I fail to see why I should get an injection. If you are susceptible or if it would be hazardous to get the flu, then by all means if you choose to do it then get the shot. But injecting a perfectly healthy person with chemicals known to cause problems simply doesn't make any sense. My body, my choice as to what goes into it.
I don't get flu shots either. That's my choice. But it isn't because I feel they are unsafe.
If you've received a flu shot in the past 6 years the only thing you got was a chance at a bad immune reaction and a concoction of mercury, detergent and some other nasty compounds.
Thimerosal (mercury) is only used in multi-dose vials. Although these are legal in the US, they are in practice not used here. The chances you received any thimerosal in your flu shot if you got in the US is almost nil.
I do agree with the OP that two years of the last decade the WHO predicted which strains would be dominant in the US incorrectly and thus the shot didn't immunize the recipient properly against the strains they would actually face.
Yep, each link is serial. But there are multiple links working in parallel. In PCIe and in GigE.
And it's not like they are independent serial links, when there are these parallel links, as there are PCIe (except 1-bit slots), HDMI, QPI, GigE or USB 3.0, they are working in parallel to deliver the data.
Thus these busses are parallel. They use technology developed for serial links (and in the case of PCIe 1-bit or SATA are serial), but they carry multiple bits in parallel and thus are parallel.
Yeah, well, PCIe doesn't send data 1-bit at a time. It sends it 1,2,4,8 or 16 bits at a time in parallel, depending on how wide this particular slot is.
Your own wikipedia text mentions "per lane". Few PCIe slots have only one lane, and no GigE or HDMI link does.
USB is still serial, for now. USB 3.0 uses multiple parallel links and thus is parallel.
I do agree these restrictions (which are very common) do reduce H.264 to not much better than Xvid-era CODECs.
However, I again state it doesn't take additional CPU work to reference against a different frame. You just have multiple frames in memory and make your changes against a different buffer. No individual macroblock depends on more than one reference frame, so you don't have to do any extra work, just keep two (or more) different references in memory to work against.
Of course, this is all on decode. On encode, multiple reference frames makes the amount of work go up exponentially.
It is tough on a motherboard, somewhat easier on a cable.
This is why most systems now use a separate clock for each data path (i.e. wire or trace), either by using multiple clock conductors or just using a self-clocking scheme (like 8B/10B which is used in nearly everything including GigE, SATA and PCIe).
In this case, he doesn't need a jitter drive. Jitter checks are checking the media quality, not the recording quality. And he's already made the recordings, so changing the media they are on isn't an option!
Furthermore, the jitter doesn't change over time, as it is determined by the master the blank is stamped with, so once it is stamped, it remains the same forever.
He really wants to see how the ECC is functioning, how many errors it is masking over time. That's PI/PO and C1/C2, not jitter.
You need certain brands of optical drives, but with them and this program (and others), you can see the PI/PO or C1/C2 correction (I can't remember which is for CD and which is for DVD) rates on a per-sector basis on your disc. As the rates rise, the disc is going bad, becoming marginally readable and you can copy the disc before it becomes unreadable.
You can find out which drives to buy at http://cdfreaks.com/. The terminology on there for a drive that can do this is a "scanning drive".
I have no idea if you will find that your correction rates are rising over time.
HyperTransport doesn't replace FSB. Only I/O and cache synchronization transfers go over HyperTransport, data accesses do not (as AMD integrated the memory controller).
Data accesses do go over QPI though. And I don't think that QPI really moves the RAM closer to the cores. QPI's main value is that by having fewer pins, it gives more flexibility in locating the bridges and such on the motherboard.
If it is, go find the me the program where you input a md5 hash and it trivially makes a file to match it.
There have been several attacks against MD5. Some make it easier (but not nearly trivial) to make colliding files.
But one thing to remember is that many of these attacks don't change the content of the file significantly. They are trying to attack the situation where someone writes a file that says "give this guy $1 from my bank account" and signs it, and the miscreant wants to change it to "give this guy $100,000 from my back account" and have the signature match. They have changed only one important part of the file and accomplished their goal.
But in the kid porn file case, this is useless, because if you corrupt 1% of a JPEG, the JPEG is still over 95% intact, and I assure you that you can get convicted of having kid porn even if 5% of each image is garbage.
Additionally, most of the "breaks" of MD5 are where the message you are trying to match is specially constructed to be easy to match up to. In this case, the files are presumably not of that form (it would be unusual if they were) and so that class of attacks don't work.
Slashdot Mirror
So there's not much vexing in play here.
If you think HD is barely distinguishable from SD, you've seem some REALLY bad HD content.
I didn't say they don't break. Did you read my post?
I said that saying that Logitech steering wheels have more sturdy pedals isn't a valid point. A bass drum pedal needs to be shaped like a bass drum pedal, and that's going to make it less sturdy than a brake pedal.
Come on, 18%?
If you told me 10% of people can't tell that their TV is turned on or not I wouldn't be surprised.
RockBand pedals can be stamped on too. I've had mine since it came out and the bass drum pedal hasn't broken yet.
I do agree I've had more sturdy pedals on even cheap wheels. But that's because bass drum pedals (like car pedals) are supposed to be a certain shape, and that shape is inherently less sturdy than a brake pedal.
How much did it cost to defeat SCO and stop their nonsense? I'd be shocked if the legal bills on just the Novell/IBM side were under $10M.
The system worked once, at least in rendering the right decision. But few can afford to spend the amount of money this took.
Here's the thing.
The Federal government bought the land. All of it. And you are angry you only got 40% of it for free?
And now somehow you think it all should be given to you?
One handout wasn't enough for you, eh?
Alaskans get $1.85 back for every $1.00 they pay to the Federal Gov't.
So Ted Stevens played a huge role in developing Alaska on my dime. I don't need to laud him for that.
What was wrong with the Alaskan statehood compact? From what I can tell, the Federal government purchased Alaska from Russian. Then turns some of the land over to the state of Alaska? And Alaska gets to charge severance tax on oil taken up there?
Doesn't sound like a bad deal to me.
A kibicomment is 1024 comments.
lewrockwell?
Sorry, I don't get my info from cranks.
No, you are almost guaranteed to get a shot with thimerosal because most flu shots are multi-dose. Since they guess as to the strain that will be prevalent, they generally make shots that protect against several strains at once.
In addition to mercury, these shots also have aluminum and formaldehyde. Mercury and Aluminum are neurological poisons-they accumulate in the brain. Formaldehyde is a known carcinogen and is used to embalm the dead. There is no safe level of formaldehyde established for injection into a living organism.
Multi-dose doesn't mean it has inoculations against multiple strains. It means that the same liquid in a single vial is used to inject multiple people. A larger vial is used and several people get shots from it. This reduces costs. In the US, they are more concerned about getting sued if you catch something that could be traced to a contaminated vial than the cost of the vial, so they use single-dose vials where one person gets a shot from it and then the vial is thrown away. Thimerosal is not used in these vials.
See this chart:
http://www.vaccinesafety.edu/thi-table.htm
The 0s are single-dose preparations. For example Fluarix "FLUARIX is supplied as a 0.5 mL dose in a prefilled syringe." These are what is used in the US.
Are you sure you know what you are talking about?
In addition to mercury, these shots also have aluminum and formaldehyde. Mercury and Aluminum are neurological poisons-they accumulate in the brain. Formaldehyde is a known carcinogen and is used to embalm the dead. There is no safe level of formaldehyde established for injection into a living organism.
Formaldehyde is used to prepare the deactivated viruses used in the shot. It is not part of the final shot (of course there could be trace amounts).
There's no aluminum used in flu shots either it seems.
You might want to look into the idea of not spreading false info.
Since I have never had the flu (in the past 10 years anyway) I fail to see why I should get an injection. If you are susceptible or if it would be hazardous to get the flu, then by all means if you choose to do it then get the shot. But injecting a perfectly healthy person with chemicals known to cause problems simply doesn't make any sense. My body, my choice as to what goes into it.
I don't get flu shots either. That's my choice. But it isn't because I feel they are unsafe.
If you've received a flu shot in the past 6 years the only thing you got was a chance at a bad immune reaction and a concoction of mercury, detergent and some other nasty compounds.
Thimerosal (mercury) is only used in multi-dose vials. Although these are legal in the US, they are in practice not used here. The chances you received any thimerosal in your flu shot if you got in the US is almost nil.
I do agree with the OP that two years of the last decade the WHO predicted which strains would be dominant in the US incorrectly and thus the shot didn't immunize the recipient properly against the strains they would actually face.
Yep, each link is serial. But there are multiple links working in parallel. In PCIe and in GigE.
And it's not like they are independent serial links, when there are these parallel links, as there are PCIe (except 1-bit slots), HDMI, QPI, GigE or USB 3.0, they are working in parallel to deliver the data.
Thus these busses are parallel. They use technology developed for serial links (and in the case of PCIe 1-bit or SATA are serial), but they carry multiple bits in parallel and thus are parallel.
PCIe doesn't send a byte one bit at a time, unless you have a 1-lane slot. It sends it 1,2,4, 8 or 16 bits at a time.
The bits are not unrelated, they are all from the same packet (for PCIe/GigE) or pixel (DVI/HDMI).
I cannot see how you don't understand this.
Yeah, well, PCIe doesn't send data 1-bit at a time. It sends it 1,2,4,8 or 16 bits at a time in parallel, depending on how wide this particular slot is.
Your own wikipedia text mentions "per lane". Few PCIe slots have only one lane, and no GigE or HDMI link does.
USB is still serial, for now. USB 3.0 uses multiple parallel links and thus is parallel.
I do agree these restrictions (which are very common) do reduce H.264 to not much better than Xvid-era CODECs.
However, I again state it doesn't take additional CPU work to reference against a different frame. You just have multiple frames in memory and make your changes against a different buffer. No individual macroblock depends on more than one reference frame, so you don't have to do any extra work, just keep two (or more) different references in memory to work against.
Of course, this is all on decode. On encode, multiple reference frames makes the amount of work go up exponentially.
It is tough on a motherboard, somewhat easier on a cable.
This is why most systems now use a separate clock for each data path (i.e. wire or trace), either by using multiple clock conductors or just using a self-clocking scheme (like 8B/10B which is used in nearly everything including GigE, SATA and PCIe).
Serial and parallel aren't protocols. They are transmission methods.
And if you have multiple parallel signals making up your data, you're going parallel, not serial.
In this case, he doesn't need a jitter drive. Jitter checks are checking the media quality, not the recording quality. And he's already made the recordings, so changing the media they are on isn't an option!
Furthermore, the jitter doesn't change over time, as it is determined by the master the blank is stamped with, so once it is stamped, it remains the same forever.
He really wants to see how the ECC is functioning, how many errors it is masking over time. That's PI/PO and C1/C2, not jitter.
http://www.cdspeed2000.com/
You need certain brands of optical drives, but with them and this program (and others), you can see the PI/PO or C1/C2 correction (I can't remember which is for CD and which is for DVD) rates on a per-sector basis on your disc. As the rates rise, the disc is going bad, becoming marginally readable and you can copy the disc before it becomes unreadable.
You can find out which drives to buy at http://cdfreaks.com/. The terminology on there for a drive that can do this is a "scanning drive".
I have no idea if you will find that your correction rates are rising over time.
HyperTransport doesn't replace FSB. Only I/O and cache synchronization transfers go over HyperTransport, data accesses do not (as AMD integrated the memory controller).
Data accesses do go over QPI though. And I don't think that QPI really moves the RAM closer to the cores. QPI's main value is that by having fewer pins, it gives more flexibility in locating the bridges and such on the motherboard.
FB-DIMMs are dead. Intel is dropping them in favor of QuickPath.
FB-DIMMs use 10 parallel paths (14 in the other direction). RDRAM used 4, 8 in later version (for more performance).
I have no idea where people are getting the idea parallel is dead. Most these busses mentioned are parallel.
Gigabit ethernet uses 4 parallel links. PCIe uses 1,2,4, 8 or 16 parallel links. QPI uses 20 parallel links.
Serial just isn't fast enough for things like RAM, PCIe or QPI.
16 B-Frames and multiple reference frames are memory intensive, not CPU intensive. That was my main point.
During decode, there's no additional CPU work to reference against a 2nd (or 3rd) frame, but it does take a lot more memory.
Aritmatic coding/CABAC I think is only used in the main profiles, most H.264 content the BBC would be sending would be baseline profile.
H.264 isn't too much more CPU intensive than MPEG-4, but it's far more memory intensive. That's what makes it tough for phones.
MD5 is not "broken".
If it is, go find the me the program where you input a md5 hash and it trivially makes a file to match it.
There have been several attacks against MD5. Some make it easier (but not nearly trivial) to make colliding files.
But one thing to remember is that many of these attacks don't change the content of the file significantly. They are trying to attack the situation where someone writes a file that says "give this guy $1 from my bank account" and signs it, and the miscreant wants to change it to "give this guy $100,000 from my back account" and have the signature match. They have changed only one important part of the file and accomplished their goal.
But in the kid porn file case, this is useless, because if you corrupt 1% of a JPEG, the JPEG is still over 95% intact, and I assure you that you can get convicted of having kid porn even if 5% of each image is garbage.
Additionally, most of the "breaks" of MD5 are where the message you are trying to match is specially constructed to be easy to match up to. In this case, the files are presumably not of that form (it would be unusual if they were) and so that class of attacks don't work.