For accuracy, you absolutely need it. For preference, it not necessary. We're talking about accuracy here, not preference. The original post I responded to claimed that analog was, until recently, the highest accuracy you can get and then talked about how records are better than CD. They may be preferred - but they are NOT more accurate.
Then why did TFS spend 90% of it discussing the new President, and how it's going to be bad? It's called implication, and if you can't understand that, well, you're a bit too dense.
You're an idiot. You get 1 if you log in (zero if you're an AC); if you have posted a lot and gotten a lot of up-mods, you get a karma modifier. That's what Bill (and myself) have. Click on the (score:2) and it will tell you that.
Bzzt. Fail. SNR (and hence, dynamic range) of CD is always 96 dB; the master may be noisy, and the DAC may be noisy, but the medium itself is 96 dB (about 6 dB per bit). Likewise bandwidth is always 22.05 kHz (thanks to Nyquist and Fourier and a bunch of others). The master may be limited, the speakers or amps or DAC may be limited, but the medium itself is good for just a bit more than 22 kHz. And cross-talk? Essentially infinite on CD, but on a record you're lucky to do better than 30 dB channel separation.
The best records MAY have a dynamic range around 70 dB, and very few have anything near flat response to 20 kHz, let alone below it - and do terribly below ~40 Hz (primarily because of the dynamic range compression required to support higher levels of bass). Cross-talk is much, much, worse. In any way you look at it - a CD provides higher resolution of data. What that data represents is irrelevant; the medium itself is inherently more accurate - orders of magnitude more - than records.
Protection safeguards per the HIPAA laws vary with the method of data transmission. FAXes are assumed to be confidential as long as you know the number you're dialing is correct; e-mail and other digital means require you to validate most of your entire IT chain, and probably to encrypt the e-mail as well.
Don't confuse preference (turntables) for accuracy (CD/DVD). Most people prefer some levels of distortion (low, even order, increasing amounts with SPL) and some noise added in as a constant background level. But it is not more accurate. With a FAX or other data transmission, accuracy matters - not preference.
I got some advanced C++ for a 3D FEA magnetics engine for $10/hour. Written by a physics post-doc in Russia, it was well-documented, efficient, accurate, and did exactly what I wanted. He did it in about 70 hours, where I got a few US local contractors estimating 300 hours at $125 per hour...
I get really good results using UpWork for contract SW services. This includes website development, some C++ code, IT management, etc. I've had really positive results over the last 8 years, predominantly hiring SW engineers from Eastern Europe and Asia (the best IT guy I ever had was from Vietnam; awesome service, done quickly and efficiently, and $8/hour). It helps to have really good specs and directions, though...
Software, in general, is a race to zero. There is always someone who will program cheaper than you, and the cost of replication/distribution is rapidly approaching zero. So there is always a potential to "do the same thing but cheaper" out there. Look at the cost of web hosting, OSes, productivity tools, etc. If the cost of replication and distribution is effectively zero, then the only real costs borne are the NRE costs. And that will always get cheaper. So the drive is always to zero.
Hardware, on the other hand, has a definite minimum cost for replication and distribution. You can use scale-of-economy to lower the price, but you still hit a bottom limit beyond which you cannot survive as a company. Tangible goods are more difficult to compete against for this very reason - cheaper NRE will help a little, but cannot save your company. Unlike software.
I think a strong case could be made that the massive rise in personal computing and the Internet came about precisely because of Windows. A pretty-much ubiquitous OS that was easy enough for most people to use allowed developers - hardware and software alike - to target a single platform, and that allowed rapid deployment and expansion of technology into the consumer and business worlds. This isn't about "Windows it the best/worst", this is about a pretty-much standardized platform emerging and allowing most technical advancements to target a single platform.
30+ years of "THE SKY IS FALLING!" consistently proving false, and people waking up to the realities that life really isn't that bad, we're not DOOMED!, and it sucks to have someone else dictate every part of your life. Consider it a bit of a "we want freedom" breakout. Worry about the results, not the "optics" of the action.
He can't do much until the afternoon of January 11, 2019... And given that most deforestation in Brazil happens because of farming, it makes sense to tie the department of the environment to the department of agriculture. The latter definitely affects the former, so have them work together to solve the problem, rather than at logger-heads and get nothing done.
Microsoft's stock gains have been slower and much more consistent - and the volatility of the stock is also a lot lower. Of course, MSFT makes most of its revenue from business-based revenue streams which are much less affected by consumer confidence/consumer purchasing, so it should be less volatile. Long-term, MSFT and AMZN will be the most valuable tech companies because of their dominant positions that tend to be more independent of consumer trends.
I don't discount experts; I also do not discount amateurs and new names. Science does not have an upper priesthood; data is data, science is science, and findings form amateurs should be as critically examined and accepted as those from the long-term researchers. You don't like it, though - because it challenges your doctrine. What about McIntyre, who blew apart the Mann hockey stick? What about Nic Lewis who just pointed out the major math error in the Resplandy ocean heat paper? Not experts in "the field" but their contribution is enormous - because it acts as a check on the "high priests" of AGW.
You have presented zero evidence to the contrary of my claims. Most atolls are either stable or growing. When data and theory collide, data should win - unless you treat your theory as a religion...
I guess the links I provided from National Geographic and others, stating that about 80% of all coral atolls are either stable or growing, qualifies as "a few hand picked" to you? You're remarkably light on references...
Slashdot Mirror
Ahh, yes, a large portion of the Atlantic seaboard is sinking. Around 2.8mm/yr average, and 1.8mm to 4.8mm/yr i n the central Atlantic seaboard.
For accuracy, you absolutely need it. For preference, it not necessary. We're talking about accuracy here, not preference. The original post I responded to claimed that analog was, until recently, the highest accuracy you can get and then talked about how records are better than CD. They may be preferred - but they are NOT more accurate.
Reads like he'd fit right in with the Mullahs in Iran or the leadership in Saudi Arabia!
Because the current policies are so successful? Maybe new policies will fix the issue...
Then why did TFS spend 90% of it discussing the new President, and how it's going to be bad? It's called implication, and if you can't understand that, well, you're a bit too dense.
You're an idiot. You get 1 if you log in (zero if you're an AC); if you have posted a lot and gotten a lot of up-mods, you get a karma modifier. That's what Bill (and myself) have. Click on the (score:2) and it will tell you that.
Not to mention that much of the lower half of the Atlantic seacoast is subsiding at a rate around 3-4mm per year.
Bzzt. Fail. SNR (and hence, dynamic range) of CD is always 96 dB; the master may be noisy, and the DAC may be noisy, but the medium itself is 96 dB (about 6 dB per bit). Likewise bandwidth is always 22.05 kHz (thanks to Nyquist and Fourier and a bunch of others). The master may be limited, the speakers or amps or DAC may be limited, but the medium itself is good for just a bit more than 22 kHz. And cross-talk? Essentially infinite on CD, but on a record you're lucky to do better than 30 dB channel separation.
The best records MAY have a dynamic range around 70 dB, and very few have anything near flat response to 20 kHz, let alone below it - and do terribly below ~40 Hz (primarily because of the dynamic range compression required to support higher levels of bass). Cross-talk is much, much, worse. In any way you look at it - a CD provides higher resolution of data. What that data represents is irrelevant; the medium itself is inherently more accurate - orders of magnitude more - than records.
Protection safeguards per the HIPAA laws vary with the method of data transmission. FAXes are assumed to be confidential as long as you know the number you're dialing is correct; e-mail and other digital means require you to validate most of your entire IT chain, and probably to encrypt the e-mail as well.
Don't confuse preference (turntables) for accuracy (CD/DVD). Most people prefer some levels of distortion (low, even order, increasing amounts with SPL) and some noise added in as a constant background level. But it is not more accurate. With a FAX or other data transmission, accuracy matters - not preference.
How many of those doctors, service workers, and others are required by law or regulation to use FAXes?
I got some advanced C++ for a 3D FEA magnetics engine for $10/hour. Written by a physics post-doc in Russia, it was well-documented, efficient, accurate, and did exactly what I wanted. He did it in about 70 hours, where I got a few US local contractors estimating 300 hours at $125 per hour...
I get really good results using UpWork for contract SW services. This includes website development, some C++ code, IT management, etc. I've had really positive results over the last 8 years, predominantly hiring SW engineers from Eastern Europe and Asia (the best IT guy I ever had was from Vietnam; awesome service, done quickly and efficiently, and $8/hour). It helps to have really good specs and directions, though...
Software, in general, is a race to zero. There is always someone who will program cheaper than you, and the cost of replication/distribution is rapidly approaching zero. So there is always a potential to "do the same thing but cheaper" out there. Look at the cost of web hosting, OSes, productivity tools, etc. If the cost of replication and distribution is effectively zero, then the only real costs borne are the NRE costs. And that will always get cheaper. So the drive is always to zero.
Hardware, on the other hand, has a definite minimum cost for replication and distribution. You can use scale-of-economy to lower the price, but you still hit a bottom limit beyond which you cannot survive as a company. Tangible goods are more difficult to compete against for this very reason - cheaper NRE will help a little, but cannot save your company. Unlike software.
I think a strong case could be made that the massive rise in personal computing and the Internet came about precisely because of Windows. A pretty-much ubiquitous OS that was easy enough for most people to use allowed developers - hardware and software alike - to target a single platform, and that allowed rapid deployment and expansion of technology into the consumer and business worlds. This isn't about "Windows it the best/worst", this is about a pretty-much standardized platform emerging and allowing most technical advancements to target a single platform.
Red Hat disagrees with you.
30+ years of "THE SKY IS FALLING!" consistently proving false, and people waking up to the realities that life really isn't that bad, we're not DOOMED!, and it sucks to have someone else dictate every part of your life. Consider it a bit of a "we want freedom" breakout. Worry about the results, not the "optics" of the action.
You mean those years of ~2% GDP growth? Not the 3%+ that's happened since he was sworn in as President? Or maybe the DJIA that was ~flat from 2014 to the day after the election, rather than the ~40% run-up since then? Or maybe consumer confidence that bumped up 10% in the months right after the election? Those economic recoveries?
He can't do much until the afternoon of January 11, 2019... And given that most deforestation in Brazil happens because of farming, it makes sense to tie the department of the environment to the department of agriculture. The latter definitely affects the former, so have them work together to solve the problem, rather than at logger-heads and get nothing done.
Microsoft's stock gains have been slower and much more consistent - and the volatility of the stock is also a lot lower. Of course, MSFT makes most of its revenue from business-based revenue streams which are much less affected by consumer confidence/consumer purchasing, so it should be less volatile. Long-term, MSFT and AMZN will be the most valuable tech companies because of their dominant positions that tend to be more independent of consumer trends.
Deforestation under the previous regime is now blamed on the new President who won't be seated until January 2019. Got it.
I don't discount experts; I also do not discount amateurs and new names. Science does not have an upper priesthood; data is data, science is science, and findings form amateurs should be as critically examined and accepted as those from the long-term researchers. You don't like it, though - because it challenges your doctrine. What about McIntyre, who blew apart the Mann hockey stick? What about Nic Lewis who just pointed out the major math error in the Resplandy ocean heat paper? Not experts in "the field" but their contribution is enormous - because it acts as a check on the "high priests" of AGW.
Umm, they probably ended up slowly moving to the UK, Belgium, or Norway?
You have presented zero evidence to the contrary of my claims. Most atolls are either stable or growing. When data and theory collide, data should win - unless you treat your theory as a religion...
I guess the links I provided from National Geographic and others, stating that about 80% of all coral atolls are either stable or growing, qualifies as "a few hand picked" to you? You're remarkably light on references...