• Welcome to BellGab.com Archive.
 

FUNCTION RANDOM - All Things Technological On Your Mind

Started by Camazotz Automat, August 17, 2012, 04:04:35 AM

Quote from: Art Crow on October 26, 2015, 08:59:32 PM
I can't get my perpetual motion machine to work.  >:(

It's probably your frictionless bearings.  Those things always act up.

pate

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0irFq6ISXA

I am looking for a technological representation from the past that involves Ricardo and "Corinthian Leather"

A thing of beauty, but my thyme masheen needs a new capacitor...


Quote from: GravitySucks on October 25, 2015, 11:02:21 AM
My first external hard drive was purchased for an AT&T 6300

It was 20MB.  MB, not GB. It cost me $960 with the expansion chassis.

Two weeks ago I bought a 2TB mini external drive for $79.

Anybody want to buy a box of Zip disks?
ROTFL ;D

https://ixquick-proxy.com/do/proxy2?ep=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&epile=4q6n41784r5445774q6n63784q6p38314r6935725n586o3q&edata=c89aa76cb58f8bba450da772a20991c1&ek=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&ekdata=2acd472047d83d2f1d484c3eaddc4ae1

Quote from: wr250 on October 24, 2015, 05:14:05 AM
you would also not be able to get art on the radio either.and your cell wont work.
Quite Right. :(   ...unless you ran a shielded pass-through box for an antenna. ($$$)


Juan

My Wordpress website has been hacked - again - and now the crooks at Host Gator say they no longer do cleaning.  They recommend an outfit called SiteLock, but those folks don't get the best reviews online.  Is there any software that will really clean a site, or would I be better off just deleting everything and starting over?

Quote from: pate on October 27, 2015, 01:58:00 AM

I am looking for a technological representation from the past that involves Ricardo and "Corinthian Leather"

A thing of beauty, but my thyme masheen needs a new capacitor...

32 mpg too

wr250

i cant recommend  trucrypt to anyone anymore. 2 flaws have bee found that when exploited lets the exploiter elevate privileges to the administrator level. although they still cant decrypt data, they can do everything a admin can do including, but not limited to:
format drives
install/remove potentially malicious software
disable antivirus protection
http://www.esecurityplanet.com/open-source-security/truecrypt-travails-continue-1.html

albrecht

So I guess we have a new policy is dealing with kidnappers?
https://securityledger.com/2015/10/fbis-advice-on-cryptolocker-just-pay-the-ransom/
ps: having said that I know someone who paid and got the documents back, so, I guess, the FBI is correct. But the precedent and now with official sanction (of sorts) doesn't bode well.


wr250


Windows 10 will be made an automatic “recommended” update early next year.
this means it will autostart the windows 10 installer automatically (depending on your windows update settings).
http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2015/10/windows-10-will-be-made-an-automatic-recommended-update-early-next-year/

Quote from: wr250 on October 31, 2015, 06:23:00 AM
Windows 10 will be made an automatic “recommended” update early next year.
this means it will autostart the windows 10 installer automatically (depending on your windows update settings).
http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2015/10/windows-10-will-be-made-an-automatic-recommended-update-early-next-year/




wr250

linus torvalds rants again :

Christ people. This is just sh*t.

The conflict I get is due to stupid new gcc header file crap. But what
makes me upset is that the crap is for completely bogus reasons.

This is the old code in net/ipv6/ip6_output.c:

mtu -= hlen + sizeof(struct frag_hdr);

and this is the new "improved" code that uses fancy stuff that wants
magical built-in compiler support and has silly wrapper functions for
when it doesn't exist:

if (overflow_usub(mtu, hlen + sizeof(struct frag_hdr), &mtu) ||
mtu <= 7)
goto fail_toobig;

and anybody who thinks that the above is

(a) legible
(b) efficient (even with the magical compiler support)
(c) particularly safe

is just incompetent and out to lunch.

The above code is sh*t, and it generates shit code. It looks bad, and
there's no reason for it.

The code could *easily* have been done with just a single and
understandable conditional, and the compiler would actually have
generated better code, and the code would look better and more
understandable. Why is this not

if (mtu < hlen + sizeof(struct frag_hdr) + 8)
goto fail_toobig;
mtu -= hlen + sizeof(struct frag_hdr);

which is the same number of lines, doesn't use crazy helper functions
that nobody knows what they do, and is much more obvious what it
actually does.

I guarantee that the second more obvious version is easier to read and
understand. Does anybody really want to dispute this?

Really. Give me *one* reason why it was written in that idiotic way
with two different conditionals, and a shiny new nonstandard function
that wants particular compiler support to generate even half-way sane
code, and even then generates worse code? A shiny function that we
have never ever needed anywhere else, and that is just
compiler-masturbation.

And yes, you still could have overflow issues if the whole "hlen +
xyz" expression overflows, but quite frankly, the "overflow_usub()"
code had that too. So if you worry about that, then you damn well
didn't do the right thing to begin with.

So I really see no reason for this kind of complete idiotic crap.

Tell me why. Because I'm not pulling this kind of completely insane
stuff that generates conflicts at rc7 time, and that seems to have
absolutely no reason for being anm idiotic unreadable mess.

The code seems *designed* to use that new "overflow_usub()" code. It
seems to be an excuse to use that function.

And it's a f*cking bad excuse for that braindamage.

I'm sorry, but we don't add idiotic new interfaces like this for
idiotic new code like that.

Yes, yes, if this had stayed inside the network layer I would never
have noticed. But since I *did* notice, I really don't want to pull
this. In fact, I want to make it clear to *everybody* that code like
this is completely unacceptable. Anybody who thinks that code like
this is "safe" and "secure" because it uses fancy overflow detection
functions is so far out to lunch that it's not even funny. All this
kind of crap does is to make the code a unreadable mess with code that
no sane person will ever really understand what it actually does.

Get rid of it. And I don't *ever* want to see that shit again.

Linus

http://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1510.3/02866.html



wr250

the above is because windows cant even upgrade "in use files" ,let alone a kernel update without rebooting.

Quote from: wr250 on November 03, 2015, 08:33:48 PM
linus torvalds rants again :

Christ people. This is just sh*t.

The conflict I get is due to stupid new gcc header file crap. But what
makes me upset is that the crap is for completely bogus reasons.

....

A shiny function that we have never ever needed anywhere else, and that is just compiler-masturbation.

This belongs in the politics area.

Reported.

Coders matter.

wr250

Quote from: Camazotz Automat on November 08, 2015, 07:39:20 PM
This belongs in the politics area.

Reported.

Coders matter.
well, mayo wasnt mentioned or i would of put it in the falkie thread.

albrecht

I'll repost in "tech" since music is, apparently youtube links (or I'm just an ignored user. hahaha.):So unless playing on your hi-fi doesn't it matter what compression algorithm you listen too? I know even CD can be suspect but, honestly, if one is listening from their ear-buds (or even high-end ear phone stuff) from a smartphone or computer are there any benefits of FLAC, APE, etc or is mp3 good enough- considering the processing/capacity of the smartphone and earbuds? Dynamic range, compression, etc I gotta think don't matter when listen on cheap equipment like earbuds? Just curious. Sometimes I find good stuff online but often it is FLAC and a symphony, or even just an album, etc takes up A LOT of space.

GravitySucks

Quote from: albrecht on November 09, 2015, 12:16:37 AM
I'll repost in "tech" since music is, apparently youtube links (or I'm just an ignored user. hahaha.):So unless playing on your hi-fi doesn't it matter what compression algorithm you listen too? I know even CD can be suspect but, honestly, if one is listening from their ear-buds (or even high-end ear phone stuff) from a smartphone or computer are there any benefits of FLAC, APE, etc or is mp3 good enough- considering the processing/capacity of the smartphone and earbuds? Dynamic range, compression, etc I gotta think don't matter when listen on cheap equipment like earbuds? Just curious. Sometimes I find good stuff online but often it is FLAC and a symphony, or even just an album, etc takes up A LOT of space.

I'm not an audiophile, but I think it that below certain bit rates you lose the highs and nid range and it starts to sound flat and muffled. I can't tell much difference between 48 and 128kbps. I never go giguer than 128. I can't tell the difference between 48 mp3 and 48 aac either. Below that, I can. But i have 60 year old ears, so others will argue the finer points because this is BellGab.

albrecht

Quote from: GravitySucks on November 09, 2015, 12:24:06 AM
I'm not an audiophile, but I think it that below certain bit rates you lose the highs and nid range and it starts to sound flat and muffled. I can't tell much difference between 48 and 128kbps. I never go giguer than 128. I can't tell the difference between 48 mp3 and 48 aac either. Below that, I can. But i have 60 year old ears, so others will argue the finer points because this is BellGab.
They will, and why I posted it, in a way. I've heard rumors/bitching about CDs, back in the day, compression problems...and engineered forced for certain things, so I'm thinking if mp3s are ripped from them? But then also, this "lossless" stuff from CD would be, I guess, as good as the CD (even if remastered/manipulated?) But if from masters, records, etc are the "lossless" that better? Especially if one is not broadcasting, or even listening on a good hi-fi system? I'm thinking earbuds (and, like you, old ears) already lose a lot of the 'range'? hahaha. Unfortunately a lot of the more obscure, or even not so, recordings I can find for particularly "classical" (which does have a large range) is in FLAC, APE, etc and takes up SPACE.

cweb

Quote from: GravitySucks on November 09, 2015, 12:24:06 AM
I'm not an audiophile, but I think it that below certain bit rates you lose the highs and nid range and it starts to sound flat and muffled. I can't tell much difference between 48 and 128kbps. I never go giguer than 128. I can't tell the difference between 48 mp3 and 48 aac either. Below that, I can. But i have 60 year old ears, so others will argue the finer points because this is BellGab.
You are correct, for certain types of compression you can lose higher frequencies- including mp3. Different codecs can do different things to dynamic range, highpass/lowpass, and allowed sample rates. I won't get too detailed because it gets confusing for me and it's Monday.  :D

Quote from: albrecht on November 09, 2015, 12:30:49 AM
They will, and why I posted it, in a way. I've heard rumors/bitching about CDs, back in the day, compression problems...and engineered forced for certain things, so I'm thinking if mp3s are ripped from them? But then also, this "lossless" stuff from CD would be, I guess, as good as the CD (even if remastered/manipulated?) But if from masters, records, etc are the "lossless" that better? Especially if one is not broadcasting, or even listening on a good hi-fi system? I'm thinking earbuds (and, like you, old ears) already lose a lot of the 'range'? hahaha. Unfortunately a lot of the more obscure, or even not so, recordings I can find for particularly "classical" (which does have a large range) is in FLAC, APE, etc and takes up SPACE.
From a sound standpoint, FLAC is supposed to be identical to CD. I only use it when I can hear the difference. So yeah, most people on cheaper earbuds won't be able to tell between FLAC and average-quality MP3.

Even on higher-end stuff, some folks consider 192kbps MP3 to sound virtually identical to FLAC/original. For me it depends on the sample- in some cases I can't even differentiate 160kbps MP3.

My standpoint is- WAV/FLAC for archiving, MP3/AAC for mobile listening.

If you are never going to convert or redistribute your audio content and you are listening in a case where it sounds just fine to your ears, all is right. Anyone who wants to browbeat someone for not using FLAC because they don't "need" it is an asshole.  :)

Another thing to keep in mind would be the stages of audio production. A lot of so-called dynamic compression happens during mixing/mastering, before distribution. This is where they make the audio sound louder because it's perceptually "better" and more stuff is audible in loud environments or cheaper equipment. The problem is, some engineers take this to the extremes and it destroys nuance. Metallica's St. Anger album is a top example of what happens when you over-compress, though one could argue that the album didn't have much nuance to begin with...

albrecht

Quote from: cweb on November 09, 2015, 09:48:08 AM
You are correct, for certain types of compression you can lose higher frequencies- including mp3. Different codecs can do different things to dynamic range, highpass/lowpass, and allowed sample rates. I won't get too detailed because it gets confusing for me and it's Monday.  :D
From a sound standpoint, FLAC is supposed to be identical to CD. I only use it when I can hear the difference. So yeah, most people on cheaper earbuds won't be able to tell between FLAC and average-quality MP3.

Even on higher-end stuff, some folks consider 192kbps MP3 to sound virtually identical to FLAC/original. For me it depends on the sample- in some cases I can't even differentiate 160kbps MP3.

My standpoint is- WAV/FLAC for archiving, MP3/AAC for mobile listening.

If you are never going to convert or redistribute your audio content and you are listening in a case where it sounds just fine to your ears, all is right. Anyone who wants to browbeat someone for not using FLAC because they don't "need" it is an asshole.  :)

Another thing to keep in mind would be the stages of audio production. A lot of so-called dynamic compression happens during mixing/mastering, before distribution. This is where they make the audio sound louder because it's perceptually "better" and more stuff is audible in loud environments or cheaper equipment. The problem is, some engineers take this to the extremes and it destroys nuance. Metallica's St. Anger album is a top example of what happens when you over-compress, though one could argue that the album didn't have much nuance to begin with...
Thanks, it is much as a figured but you explained it well. I've heard about the mixing/mastering and also putting on CD issue before and specifically that Metallic album you referenced as being an egregious example. I always pause when I see old stuff "remastered," maybe it helps but I pause at least before buying. I like old live recordings and it is funny, at least to me, that some famous recordings you can hear someone cough (or try to stifle a cough) during the symphony and I always think to myself: that guy got his cough recorded for posterity! Maybe nobody even remember who he was but he is "that guy" forever- or at least until DG or Sony "remasters" the recording, I guess!

cweb

Quote from: albrecht on November 09, 2015, 07:35:09 PM
Thanks, it is much as a figured but you explained it well. I've heard about the mixing/mastering and also putting on CD issue before and specifically that Metallic album you referenced as being an egregious example. I always pause when I see old stuff "remastered," maybe it helps but I pause at least before buying. I like old live recordings and it is funny, at least to me, that some famous recordings you can hear someone cough (or try to stifle a cough) during the symphony and I always think to myself: that guy got his cough recorded for posterity! Maybe nobody even remember who he was but he is "that guy" forever- or at least until DG or Sony "remasters" the recording, I guess!
I'd love to have my cough immortalized, heh!

It's not to say that all remasters are bad. Yeah, some of them make things louder and beat the crap out of the material. But sometimes the remastering process ensures that old, aging physical media is cleaned up and preserved for another bunch of years- since remastering can involve whipping out the old tapes and re-transferring them.

To be fair here I should also point out that sometimes the master is doomed from the start due to a poor mix. Garbage in, garbage out. If the mastering engineer gets something brickwalled (think "louder than fuck") there's not much that can be done anyway.


analog kid

CuBox-i - better specs than the raspberry Pi, runs Android or Linux. Cheapest one I found on Ebay, comes with a presinstalled Android SD.

http://solid-run.com/freescale-imx6-family/cubox-i/



FONTUS. Harvest drinking water as you travel.

A stunningly simple yet clever accessory for cyclists.

For years, it has been my opinion that several areas of the world should have skyscrapers filled with solar-powered Peltier elements to provide endless drinking water to the people.

This is smaller in scale, but still awesome.

(It has been given "mandatory equipment" classification for all newcomers to Planet Dune/Arrakis. Turn your wide-tired desert bicycle into a humping stillsuit.)

http://www.jamesdysonaward.org/projects/fontus-2/







zeebo

Quote from: Camazotz Automat on November 20, 2015, 10:50:47 AM
FONTUS. Harvest drinking water as you travel.
...
It has been given "mandatory equipment" classification for all newcomers to Planet Dune/Arrakis....

Neat, it's like one of those Fremen "wind-trap" thingies.  I'll take mine with the optional spice pouch.

ItsOver

Quote from: Camazotz Automat on November 20, 2015, 10:50:47 AM
FONTUS. Harvest drinking water as you travel.

A stunningly simple yet clever accessory for cyclists.

For years, it has been my opinion that several areas of the world should have skyscrapers filled with solar-powered Peltier elements to provide endless drinking water to the people.

This is smaller in scale, but still awesome.

(It has been given "mandatory equipment" classification for all newcomers to Planet Dune/Arrakis. Turn your wide-tired desert bicycle into a humping stillsuit.)

http://www.jamesdysonaward.org/projects/fontus-2/






Pretty neat.  Why stop at bikes. 

Powered by SMFPacks Menu Editor Mod