The whole point of FLAC is not good quality, but *lossless*. You could get (e.g.) a studio to use FLAC, but never MP3 or Vorbis, even at highest quality.
ADPCM is high bit-rate but still lossy because the "difference" is not coded losslessly. As for gzip, it does not achieve 50% compression on wave files.
How many people ACTUALLY make calls from their computer? Although I understand it is free, the quality still doesn't compare to a regular phone (not even a cell phone -- don't get me started on those).
Otherwise if you steal from SCO, I don't feel any more sorry for you then if you have stole from Microsoft.
Actually, it even funnier. SCO is stealing from all the Linux contributors by distributing copyrighted software (Linux) while breaking the license (GPL, article 7).
My thought was: can you imagine if MS was as agressive as Apple with "defending its IP". Legal or not, Apple keeps threatening/suing everyone around, be it about iTunes, Aqua theme, transparent cases, look&feel,...
If they were as powerful as MS is, I just can't imagine what hell we'd be in...
Everytime I see a story like that, I imagine what it would be like if Apple was in the monopoly position that MS currently has. I really hate what MS is doing these days, but I think Apple would do 10 time worse it it was powerful enough.
So very wrong. If you were right, that would mean that I could write a GPLed program that reimplements the MP3 patent, and then tell Thompson Media that their patent is violating the GPL.
No, it's not the patent that's violating the GPL. The GPL only states that if you can redistribute the software freely because of a patent, then you can't redistribute it at all. The problem is that SCO is distributing Linux (Thompson is not distributing GPL MP3 software), so since it claims you can't redistribute it freely, they're not allowed to distribute it either, because of the GPL.
So esentially, if SCOs to proved to be correct, that would make the GPL invalid for those portions of code, and thus it would be free game for anybody to use the code. Then SCO could be free to grab the code and enforce their patents anyway, an effort must made easier by removing that pesky GPL.
No, the GPl says: If you cannot distribute so as to satisfy simultaneously your obligations under this License and any other pertinent obligations, then as a consequence you may not distribute the Program at all. That's quite different than "the GPL doesn't apply is there's a patent".
From the press release: "SCO is a Linux vendor and a leading member of United Linux", so SCO is distributing (claimed) patented software. However, from the GPL:
7. If, as a consequence of a court judgment or allegation of patent infringement or for any other reason (not limited to patent issues), conditions are imposed on you (whether by court order, agreement or otherwise) that contradict the conditions of this License, they do not excuse you from the conditions of this License. If you cannot distribute so as to satisfy simultaneously your obligations under this License and any other pertinent obligations, then as a consequence you may not distribute the Program at all. For example, if a patent license would not permit royalty-free redistribution of the Program by all those who receive copies directly or indirectly through you, then the only way you could satisfy both it and this License would be to refrain entirely from distribution of the Program.
That means that by not licensing the patents for free they're violating the GPL. Wonder if that infringement on the GPL could be used to invalidate their claim for money on Linux?
Pure Si is an insulator too, but not good enough for the ultra-thin gates of MOS transistors in current designs. Gate (leak) currents are already getting too large for SiO2 and I doubt that diamond is better than SiO2... Also, if you're doping, it's likely that you can't get pure-C (diamond) insulators.
For doping, I guess there isn't much choice other than to use nitrogen and Boron with ion implant...
I wonder how they're going to replace SiO2 as an insulator. With silicon, if you want an insulator, you just add oxygen and heat a bit and you get an SiO2 (glass) layer, which is a good insulator. With Carbon (diamond), all you'd get is CO2, which is pretty useless (not to mention anti-Kyoto). They'll need a good (and cheap) insulator for carbon, don't remember what they did for GaAs, though...
Completely agree. This guy's solution is along the way of: "what's good for greedy corporations is good for the US"....oh and let's teach all the children that whatever happens, the US is always the best nation in the world and that any "stranger" claiming otherwise is just jaleous...
In 2000, there were 16,653 fatalities in alcohol-related crashes
If firearms make almost the same number of victims than alcohol, then it's even worse than I thought. Another reason why your argument is weak: ~3000 deaths in WTC attacks, the same as the number gun victims during 3 months. Is that a reason to do nothing (your reasonning implies that)?
Number of people killed PER legally owned civilian firearm.
Who cares? The idea is to reduce the number of murders, not the murder by firearm. Otherwise, it would imply that if you manage to have 4 times more firearms and "only" twice more murders, it's a good thing.
Ever tried arguing without considering the other side as "ignorant"? Usually works much better:)
If there were no guns a substitute would simply be found, like a knife. If you want to stop crime you have to try to focus on something that can be influenced in the equation, the person.
I'm not saying that there's no education to do... but face it, education has its limit and you'll still have a low percentage of the population that you won't change no matter what. Also, sure some people will turn to knives, but even knives are still less dangerous for a number of reasons: wounds are less likely to be lethal, also you can't stab at a distance,...
The other thing I don't understand is that necessity to own a gun. I've heard many "I need a gun to protect myself from other people with guns". Now, what if there are no guns? Suddenly, you don't need a gun to protect yourself.
What if you take everything away from a man. He could still kill you with his bare hands.
Sure, there are tons of armed robberies done with bare hands;-)
For a shooting to take place (in the US), you need 1) an American and 2) a gun. Now a way of preventing shootings is to remove one of the ingredients. Either get rid of guns or get rid of Americains;-)
If you do that with a neural net, you're in for a Nobel;-) but don't count too much on it... BTW, the PDE (partial differential equations, not ODE) already give pretty good results for a system of that complexity. Mostly since the real usefulness of the forecasts are for high altitudes, to make aircrafts save fuel and these are usualy more accurate.
We should develop a complete understanding of weather based entirely on theory and calculation
The understanding and models are already very good. The problem is the size of the (computational) problem: a planet with a 6000 km radius for which there are phenomenons happening on a km scale. Plus, the system is inherently caotic...
I understand your point... but then what he do in that case? change name? Do you have to change your name any time someone with that name becomes more popular than you are? Even "clarifications" could be painful. Would you like to write a clarification anytime you write your name on anything just because some celebrity has the same name?
I did something similar for my master project: take audio sampled at 8 kHz and produce a new file sampled at 16 kHz, where the "missing frequencies" (4-8 kHz) are "guessed" from the information available. This makes a telephone conversation sound (if everything goes well) like radio quality.
Does anyone know if Evolution will be ported to Windows?
Don't count on a native Windows port... unless you want to do it! I don't think it fits the Ximian (or any other company) business model at all. Of course, it's might be possible to compile it using Cygwin, but then installing Linux is probably much simpler.
1. Sue Linus and try to settle with the condition that he can't work on Linux anymore. 2. Sue developer for same reason as 1. 3. Sue RedHat, so they have to spend considerable resources that they won't be able to spend on improving Linux. 4. Sue companies to scare them off from making Linux-based products 5. Sue companies to scare them off from using Linux 6. Suing Cowboyneal is cool.
Slashdot Mirror
0 MB using "rm" (100% compression)
The whole point of FLAC is not good quality, but *lossless*. You could get (e.g.) a studio to use FLAC, but never MP3 or Vorbis, even at highest quality.
ADPCM is high bit-rate but still lossy because the "difference" is not coded losslessly. As for gzip, it does not achieve 50% compression on wave files.
How many people ACTUALLY make calls from their computer? Although I understand it is free, the quality still doesn't compare to a regular phone (not even a cell phone -- don't get me started on those).
All depends on the codec. Sure G.723.1 quality isn't that good but there are better options (with a bit more bandwidth). GnomeMeeting already supports Speex (blatant plug) which can give much better quality, and even wideband (16 kHz sampling), which is much better than normal phone (though not used by GnomeMeeting yet).
That'll be nice to watch. Jobs going after everyone waving an Americal flag for copyright/trademark violation. Not that I would mind (being Canadian)
Otherwise if you steal from SCO, I don't feel any more sorry for you then if you have stole from Microsoft.
Actually, it even funnier. SCO is stealing from all the Linux contributors by distributing copyrighted software (Linux) while breaking the license (GPL, article 7).
My thought was: can you imagine if MS was as agressive as Apple with "defending its IP". Legal or not, Apple keeps threatening/suing everyone around, be it about iTunes, Aqua theme, transparent cases, look&feel, ...
If they were as powerful as MS is, I just can't imagine what hell we'd be in...
Everytime I see a story like that, I imagine what it would be like if Apple was in the monopoly position that MS currently has. I really hate what MS is doing these days, but I think Apple would do 10 time worse it it was powerful enough.
So very wrong. If you were right, that would mean that I could write a GPLed program that reimplements the MP3 patent, and then tell Thompson Media that their patent is violating the GPL.
No, it's not the patent that's violating the GPL. The GPL only states that if you can redistribute the software freely because of a patent, then you can't redistribute it at all. The problem is that SCO is distributing Linux (Thompson is not distributing GPL MP3 software), so since it claims you can't redistribute it freely, they're not allowed to distribute it either, because of the GPL.
So esentially, if SCOs to proved to be correct, that would make the GPL invalid for those portions of code, and thus it would be free game for anybody to use the code. Then SCO could be free to grab the code and enforce their patents anyway, an effort must made easier by removing that pesky GPL.
No, the GPl says: If you cannot distribute so as to satisfy simultaneously your obligations under this License and any other pertinent obligations, then as a consequence you may not distribute the Program at all. That's quite different than "the GPL doesn't apply is there's a patent".
From the press release: "SCO is a Linux vendor and a leading member of United Linux", so SCO is distributing (claimed) patented software. However, from the GPL:
7. If, as a consequence of a court judgment or allegation of patent infringement or for any other reason (not limited to patent issues), conditions are imposed on you (whether by court order, agreement or otherwise) that contradict the conditions of this License, they do not excuse you from the conditions of this License. If you cannot distribute so as to satisfy simultaneously your obligations under this License and any other pertinent obligations, then as a consequence you may not distribute the Program at all. For example, if a patent license would not permit royalty-free redistribution of the Program by all those who receive copies directly or indirectly through you, then the only way you could satisfy both it and this License would be to refrain entirely from distribution of the Program.
That means that by not licensing the patents for free they're violating the GPL. Wonder if that infringement on the GPL could be used to invalidate their claim for money on Linux?
Diamond IS an insulator
Pure Si is an insulator too, but not good enough for the ultra-thin gates of MOS transistors in current designs. Gate (leak) currents are already getting too large for SiO2 and I doubt that diamond is better than SiO2... Also, if you're doping, it's likely that you can't get pure-C (diamond) insulators.
For doping, I guess there isn't much choice other than to use nitrogen and Boron with ion implant...
I wonder how they're going to replace SiO2 as an insulator. With silicon, if you want an insulator, you just add oxygen and heat a bit and you get an SiO2 (glass) layer, which is a good insulator. With Carbon (diamond), all you'd get is CO2, which is pretty useless (not to mention anti-Kyoto). They'll need a good (and cheap) insulator for carbon, don't remember what they did for GaAs, though...
My second thought is "Go Freenet!"
Freenet will protect you against censorship, but I don't think it'll protect your privacy (your ISP knows your IP).
That's because we're sooooo jaleous of Americans ;)
Completely agree. This guy's solution is along the way of: "what's good for greedy corporations is good for the US". ...oh and let's teach all the children that whatever happens, the US is always the best nation in the world and that any "stranger" claiming otherwise is just jaleous...
In 2000, there were 16,653 fatalities in alcohol-related crashes
If firearms make almost the same number of victims than alcohol, then it's even worse than I thought. Another reason why your argument is weak: ~3000 deaths in WTC attacks, the same as the number gun victims during 3 months. Is that a reason to do nothing (your reasonning implies that)?
Number of people killed PER legally owned civilian firearm.
Who cares? The idea is to reduce the number of murders, not the murder by firearm. Otherwise, it would imply that if you manage to have 4 times more firearms and "only" twice more murders, it's a good thing.
That is an ignorant statement.
:)
...
;-)
Ever tried arguing without considering the other side as "ignorant"? Usually works much better
If there were no guns a substitute would simply be found, like a knife. If you want to stop crime you have to try to focus on something that can be influenced in the equation, the person.
I'm not saying that there's no education to do... but face it, education has its limit and you'll still have a low percentage of the population that you won't change no matter what. Also, sure some people will turn to knives, but even knives are still less dangerous for a number of reasons: wounds are less likely to be lethal, also you can't stab at a distance,
The other thing I don't understand is that necessity to own a gun. I've heard many "I need a gun to protect myself from other people with guns". Now, what if there are no guns? Suddenly, you don't need a gun to protect yourself.
What if you take everything away from a man. He could still kill you with his bare hands.
Sure, there are tons of armed robberies done with bare hands
Fact: Guns don't kill people, Americans kill people.
;-)
For a shooting to take place (in the US), you need 1) an American and 2) a gun. Now a way of preventing shootings is to remove one of the ingredients. Either get rid of guns or get rid of Americains
If you do that with a neural net, you're in for a Nobel ;-) but don't count too much on it... BTW, the PDE (partial differential equations, not ODE) already give pretty good results for a system of that complexity. Mostly since the real usefulness of the forecasts are for high altitudes, to make aircrafts save fuel and these are usualy more accurate.
We should develop a complete understanding of weather based entirely on theory and calculation
The understanding and models are already very good. The problem is the size of the (computational) problem: a planet with a 6000 km radius for which there are phenomenons happening on a km scale. Plus, the system is inherently caotic...
in 'the formats they are demanding'
"After 1 year of research we found out that users love DRM and want nothing but DRM, so that's what we'll offer"
I understand your point... but then what he do in that case? change name? Do you have to change your name any time someone with that name becomes more popular than you are? Even "clarifications" could be painful. Would you like to write a clarification anytime you write your name on anything just because some celebrity has the same name?
I did something similar for my master project: take audio sampled at 8 kHz and produce a new file sampled at 16 kHz, where the "missing frequencies" (4-8 kHz) are "guessed" from the information available. This makes a telephone conversation sound (if everything goes well) like radio quality.
Does anyone know if Evolution will be ported to Windows?
Don't count on a native Windows port... unless you want to do it! I don't think it fits the Ximian (or any other company) business model at all. Of course, it's might be possible to compile it using Cygwin, but then installing Linux is probably much simpler.
7. All of the above:
1. Sue Linus and try to settle with the condition that he can't work on Linux anymore.
2. Sue developer for same reason as 1.
3. Sue RedHat, so they have to spend considerable resources that they won't be able to spend on improving Linux.
4. Sue companies to scare them off from making Linux-based products
5. Sue companies to scare them off from using Linux
6. Suing Cowboyneal is cool.