Re: Thin end of the wedge?
Lib Dem, then?
231 posts • joined 26 Jan 2010
Yes, it's a sonic sin.
If only audio files were distributed as the raw microphone inputs along with a DSP settings file so that all mixing and signal processing could be done (and reconfigured) at the listener's end.
Even mobile phones are powerful enough to do the required mixing and DSP in real time.
I sometimes wish that on TV, background noise tracks could be broadcast separately from dialogue, for example.
Yes I know that no recording ever clips, but in the old days, this was done by someone looking at a VU meter, asking the guitarist to twang really loudly, and then adjusting the gain so that it doesn't go too far into the red. The gain knob is then left in the same place for the duration of the performance/recording. There is no automatic adjustment of that gain knob in real time by some software to try to make the whole track sound as loud as possible.
That's what I meant by 'recordings should obey the superposition principle'. Your mixer should produce a linear sum of all the input channels, at different (but time-invariant) amplifications. That way it can be decomposed into its original sources, by my ears. If the different channels keep changing their volume based on what else is going on, I find something else to listen to because I find that nauseating.
Shove that up your side-chain and smoke it.
No, you should be apologising for flattening off the peaks of your audio to make it sound "louder" instead of just choosing a level for each channel and sticking to it, so that the final mix doesn't "clip" in the loudest part, even if that sounds "quiet" to you. Good recordings should obey the superposition principle. Turn off your compressors and limiters.
Pisses me off when what should be loud drum beats instead seem to "subtract" from the rest of the music (i.e. the music fades away either side of the drum beat) because some twat "audio engineer" thought it sounded louder that way.
REALLY pisses me off when stations like Classic FM try to play something like the 1812 overture, and due to the compressors and limiters they use, at the very end it's nothing but a pathetic grey mush as the orchestra is supposed to reach its fortissimo peak and the cannons fire.
If I want it louder I'll turn it up. Go away. You ARE a horrible person. But not a racist.
@claptrapp314 I'm not sure who you are implying is acting deliberately there..
But TBH, I think this sort of thing is something that only the Gooogles, Amazons, Microsofts and Apples of this world have the ability to implement efficiently (after all, most of their code is closed source anyway, and snap decisions can always be made by diktat). While it severely hurts open source having this sort of moral panic in public, causing a schism amongst their developers, over something that no-one really cares about.
And guess who are most in favour? Oh, the big corporates. Makes their CSR look so wonderful, and scatters those pesky penguins.
> "The proposal has allowed for exceptions when maintaining a userspace API or when updating a code for a specification that mandates those terms. "
And what about when maintaining a kernel space API?
ERROR Unresolved Symbol PCI_MASTER_READ
Pretty sure that developers of proprietary kernel space drivers (e.g. NVIDIA, Intel) will be tearing their hair out at this
After all none of us are really black at all - nor are any of us white. We are all (in varying shades) Brown.
The only thing that it is reasonable to do to repay the horrors of the past, is to stand up against those horrors when they appear in the present. Like (as someone mentioned above) the treatment of ethnic Libyans, Palestinians, Uighurs, Cantonese. We should be taking a stand against the actual oppression that exists today, not trying to white-wash (oh no! I said white) history - that only serves to demean those who continue to suffer.
Not making bizarre, pointless and counter-productive changes to a piece of software that has bugger all to do with any of it!
You mean whitelist/blacklist?
Even these terms I doubt had any malign intent when they were used or even coined. It's like with an optical filter - a white one lets through photons while a black one does not. A whitelist lets through the specified packet types, like a list of holes in a punched card, while a blacklist blocks the specified types, like a list of un-punched "black" positions on the card.
Are we to expunge all emotional reference to colour from our language then? Dark times ahead, I fear. (oops)
All sounds like Newspeak to me..
Couldn't agree more. To virtue signal is to claim that you "care", but you are too lazy or selfish to do anything meaningful about the problem.
Call me cynical, but this sort of thing could also be used to deliberately divide and disrupt an open source community or organisation..
Oh well, I'm glad I am out of the nuclear remote handling industry, where I was working on a "Master/Slave Manipulator" (commonly abbreviated to MSM)
While I support the BLM movement, I think going back and refactoring a huge codebase to remove banned words that were used without any malign connotation, could have ununtended consequences. Such as serious bugs being introduced into the code, or API compatibility issues.
For example, grepping the linux kernel headers (just the headers, which all have API compatibility implications) there are 1645 lines containing the word "master" and 1550 lines containing the word "slave". Think of all the code reviews needed to expunge just two banned terms arising from today's moral panic. What about all the others, and what about tomorrow's moral panic?
I highly doubt that anyone was intending any malice when they used these terms, no more than the inventor of the "kill" command, which "kills" a process along with all of its "children" had murderous intent. Or perhaps we should expunge that too, out of solidarity for victims of mass murder.
I really don't see how borking the Linux kernel helps anyone?
How about doing something real and tangible to address poverty, race and class inequality instead? Donate to education charities, support minority ethnic inclusion in tech outreach programs, vote Labour...
Virtue signaling is one thing, but imposing it on the world's most well-established codebase is both worthless and self-defeating.
I submit that "Audio Engineer" is a parasitic non-profession that should be eradicated. Along with PPI claim agents, ambulance chasers and telephone sanitsers (ok maybe telephone sanitisers could be necessary for the time being). And that "Mastering" of audio tracks should be banned (for reasons unrelated to slavery)
Ideally, every audio track sold should include all source recordings (mic inputs etc), using software at the listener's end to do the mixing and DSP, with a text-based settings file for the suggested "master" which the listener can change according to his/her tastes or mood.
More practically, I think that mixing of audio source material in a non-linear way (such as compressors or limiters designed to maximise "loudness" of the overall track, and "side-chains" designed to maximise or flatten the loudness of a subset of the sources) should be banned.
While I appreciate that for some it may be an artistic effect, it is also (mathematically) a one-way transformation, a bit like one of Damien Hurst's bisected cows. OK from one angle, grotesque from another.
Therefore, I ask that recording artists please supply us with the living cow, and we can chop it in half with a chainsaw ourselves if we choose. Stop paying quack "audio engineers" to butcher it before we can even hear it moo.
Stock options? At Magic Leap??
A company inflated by beeeeelion-dollar investments that has nothing remotely approaching a product..?
Maybe if she and her Microsoft chums open short positions, crash it to the ground, and then buy it for the IP?
Illegal, maybe, but hey we're Microsoft.
Hahaha, that's what I thought about Stephen Elop (see post below)
You'd have thought so..
Microsoft exec joins as new CEO of Nokia. Immediately announces that Nokia will be ditching the successful line of Linux (Debian)-based phones (N900, N950) and Maemo OS that they spent the last 5+ years developing - it would have been a serious competitor to iOS and Android.. N900 was the best phone you could wish for.
Also they would be ditching their Symbian platform, and most people working on Phones for Nokia would be laid off. From now on, Nokia will only sell Windows Phones, because that's the future.
Anyone would think that Microsoft were trying to kill off two competitors to Windows Mobile, by driving Nokia into the ground with an inside man as their CEO, and as a triple-whammy, dump their share price so they could buy them at a bargain price.
Shurely that would be illegal, until they did it.
Very much hits the nail.
Facial recognition is "just good enough" that it can be used as a smokescreen for a police state.
It basically says 96% of us are suspected ne'er do-wells. The 4% being those who fall into the statistical category of "highly affluent white folk who might be in a position to sue the police if falsely accused".
The 96% are then subject to the individual police officer's prejudices and ulterior motives, and if you happen to be in a category who probably doesn't have the resources to defend themselves adequately, then you can be convicted of whatever the hell they want.
So you're saying that Ofcom believed that analogue radio was going to die out very soon (despite massive opposition for a switch off) and so they reduced the analogue license fees to essentially zero for an entire decade?
Trebles all round at Classic FM then! Sucks to be a new national DAB station like Union JACK in that case.
I seem to remember multiple Beeellions being involved in the 2004 analogue TV spectrum auction..
Presumably Vodafone et al must have realised by now that 200MHz wavelength is a bit long for a handset (unless they wanted it for backhaul) but while switching off analogue TV made sense with the compression ratio that digital video affords, doing the same for radio is and always was stupid. It occupies very little bandwidth anyway, and the costs outweigh the benefits in every area. e.g. people listen to radio on the move, whereas TVs are usually static, so they don't need to re-establish a link. Once the antenna is tweaked enough to work, it usually stays that way.
Whereas driving around with a DAB radio in the car going on and off is beyond annoying.
It's epitomised by the phrase "something must be seen to be done"!
As if being seen to be doing "something" is more important than what is actually done.
In contrast with the US (which in many parts is actually racist), the UK has very little racism in its culture. The real problem in the UK is classism- plutocratic inequality - discrimination against the poor - the ability of the super-rich to make themselves richer at the expense of the poor, and discrimination against anyone from a poor background, preventing any upward social mobility.
This move by MS does absolutely nothing to address racism - instead it continues to sow division among the middle and lower classes, letting them fight among themselves while the super rich get richer and yet more powerful.
is the small subset of applications which fail to run properly in a VM.
Namely games, the occasional CAD package, certain f*cking .NET apps, and anything else that can't run under either Wine, Mono or VirtualBox. VR tends to be the only reason to dig out my SSD-with-windows-on and boot it
So, how exactly does putting all win32 apps into VMs with RDP routing help Windows' case for continued existence? Certainly i'm not going to be able to run any VR games like that..
I have installed IP cameras in every room in my house, connected to a combination of Microsoft Cloud, AWS and Google, which all run an AI machine-learning computer vision system to model my whereabouts thoughts and and intentions at all times, just so my arduino can know if I would like the hall light on, or off.
Reminds me of the Chris Rea song..
But seriously, good intentions or not, I worry for the stability of western society (especially in poor soon-to-be-isolated little Britain) when so much of it depends on this shaky infrastructure designed in California.
Shops like Tesco can't even take cash now, without a connection to some Cloud ERP server.. Certainly no logistics or distribution company can work without the Cloud these days - they wouldn't even be able to ind their way to the delivery location, never mind know what to load onto the lorry.
I seriously think that society is so fragile now that it would collapse if the internet went off for a week. They probably wouldn't be able to supply amazonian wood pellets to our converted coal power stations anymore, let alone fill up the petrol stations... If you thought Brexit would be bad for our "just in time" economy..!
A month and we'd be stabbing eachother over a tin of baked beans.
MS have sat and watched Apple, Google, Dropbox et al for a while now, and come to the realisation that all their competitors seem to be going a little bit evil. But they have a monopoly on that since 1995, so naturally the best course of action is to copy what they do, but ramp up the evil. It's a niche that only Microsoft can fill, just watch while they corner the market!
While conspiring with Intel to create a secure-boot spec that makes it very difficult in some/most cases (especially corporate environments) to run Linux natively, Microsoft have conveniently taken much of what makes Linux great and integrated it into their own paid-for shitty spyware OS. Great news, for Microsoft shareholders, but I can imagine a lot of the open-source devs who created the whole GNU/Linux ecosystem being a bit upset about this.
The reason I and people like me use Linux is not about money, it's about control and a sense of (healthy, I say) paranoia. We have a massive distrust of software vendors like Microsoft, who with their inscrutable closed-source code, snoop and slurp, and push unknown updates onto you, all the while collecting a hefty tax. It really is not about the money, far from it: If there were an OS I could truly trust, I would happily pay for it. But as it happens, the only OS I can trust is free, in both senses.
> Who cares?? No one on the internet, they could just as easily use .com
I'm sure any person or small business who already has a .org address cares a lot about this.
And of course, this is the thin-end of the wedge. If this passes, then .com will be next.
We could end up in the situation where anyone can be held to ransom by the registrars. Oops, looks like your domain has become "popular", judging by the number of DNS queries for it. Therefore, the renewal price has just gone up 100x.
Without a cap, that's possible. The only reason it doesn't happen already on the uncapped TLDs is because the main ones are still capped.
It would turn the registrars, who are already barons with far too much power, into a mafia who can levy unlimited "taxes" against whomsoever they choose. And tbh, I'm sick of ICANN just bending over and doing whatever GoDaddy tells them to.
So to reply to my own post, 28dBm (which is what they are asking for) is apparently about 600mW radiated power. That's not much use as a death ray, much less to cook the christmas turkey..
However, I'm not sure what that really means in terms of an array of antennas. Is it 600mW per antenna (in which case, it goes back to death ray territory)? 600mW per beam, or does dBm not translate to radiated power anymore (because it's not uniformly radiated)
In any case, I wonder how many beams it can support, what radiated power each beam can have, and if they can all be focused on the same place?
I must say it is slightly worrying. Would it be possible for the beam-forming technology to be used to form a very-high-powered narrow beam?
Could a miscreant or some future totalitarian state decide to boil someone's brain as they walked past the antenna, by directing a death-ray at their head?
Maybe that's OK, if the person's crime-coefficient is deemed to be high..
Well, if it's 'History repeating itself' as you say, then will it be Revolutionary France, Nazi Germany, Stalin's Russia, Cultural Revolution China, Pol Pot's Cambodia, or Slobodan Milosevic's Yugoslavia?
In each case, it's always the educated people like you and I (the so-called 'liberal elite' this time) who get murdered by the uneducated masses and their populist leaders, while the real rich & powerful who have actually caused the major fuck-ups (e.g. rees-mogg, farage, raaaab & co) generally get to flee.
Honestly, I would prefer to be annihilated in a nuclear blast than get hacked to death by a machete-wielding mob, or my starving neighbour who wants the contents of my cupboard. Nuclear war is optimistic, as far as I'm concerned :(
Our society is so fragile now, you'd only need to kill the Internet for society to collapse. Drag an anchor across the Bristol channel, and suddenly nobody can do their jobs due to reliance on Cloud services, nobody gets paid, cards don't work, supermarkets like Tesco can't even take cash when the Internet is down, thanks to their cloud-based ERP, etc etc.
BTW: Austerity was just a way to try to put the brakes on a lending system that had got out of hand. It's only a halfway point between the pre-2008 circle-jerk and actual reality, whereby countries have to actually produce stuff to be rich and plentiful.
In said actual reality, the Pound is worth less than a Zimbabwean Dollar, and industrialised nations like Germany, Russia and China can walk all over us.
The basic problem is that humanity has grown too numerous to be stable. World War is inevitable, and in Britain, we're fucked.
> Oh, and as for the Illuminati - we're not interested. It's so much easier and so much more fun to see just what direly incompetent politicians we can inflict on people. World domination? We're in it for the lulz. It's funny watching people vote to be kept poor, ignorant and powerless.
Remind me who the ukranian presidential favourite is?
Then again, an airhead actor is probably better than a self-righteous "businessman" with serious vested interests.
Mary McDonnell for US president anyone?
I'm not so much worried about re-purposed RC aircraft (actually the one in the video was a lot more than that, given that it incorporated the gun as a structural element into a quite innovative fixed-wing VTOL design, with an unusual control scheme, which I suspect is what's behind the patent).
I'm far more worried about what well-resourced large corporations can do with government backing and a manufacturing supply chain geared up to produce by the millions. Imagine that thing, but with the same on-board AI computing power, "thoughtful product design" and mass-production efficiency of the DJI Mavic.
* ActiveTrack allows you to track "subjects" effortlessly * Utilises FlightAutonomy technology to sense obstacles up to 15m away, so the Mavic can "avoid" accidents * Forward & downward vision sensors let the Mavic hover precisely indoors or in places without GPS * New OcuSync transmission technology with a range of 4.3miles for video streaming * all for a bargain price of £900 * just add explosives
Those things are quite terrifying in terms of what they could do if someone decided to turn them into a weapon. (imagine a swarm of them coming at you like a Cylon missile strike, each one independently picking and tracking its own target)
Luckily though, DJI have made them into "unhackable black boxes" that always obey local government airspace restrictions, and could never ever be used for anything nefarious. Isn't that nice of them?
Actually, DJI drones cannot be used in any UK defence contracts, since the things are so murky in terms of what they are really doing inside.. plus of course they are in constant encrypted communication with China via the phone app that you MUST use if you want anything beyond basic manual 2-stick control. When you consider that all major chinese companies are "encouraged" to have a "party committee" at board level to ensure the company is serving the interests of the party, you can see why the UK/US militaries are worried about using their tech.
There's been an arms race going on, but because we were so distracted by those pesky terrists stealing our oil, we have failed to notice the starting gun.
Like I said, we're doomed.
In the west, this kind of "innovation" is gets you thrown in jail. In russia, you can be granted a patent on this shit and the state will buy it.
I dread to think what's going on in China.. Since they don't post on YouTube we won't know until they come humming round the corner.
What brexiting twats like Gavin Williamson fail to realise is, we have no "hard power" to use. If it came to war, we would stand a snowball's chance in hell. It's one thing shooting at poor uneducated arabs who have nothing but antique and makeshift weaponry, but we really have no idea what it's like fighting a war with modern weaponry on both sides. WWII is almost gone from living memory.
Call me a tinfoil-hat-wearer, but I'm pretty convinced that there's a little club of powerful russian and chinese men somewhere, who are rubbing their hands with glee after their little game of psychological operations and divide-and-rule.
Britain's "sovereign" parliament is in complete disarray and will probably never be able to make a decision on anything ever again, America is still trying to impeach its lunatic president, and little fascist parties are gaining ground all over Europe.
Honestly, I can see western society collapsing all on its own even without direct foreign intervention. Then someone steps in to "keep the peace".
When it all stabilises, we will wonder what this notion of "freedom" was, before quickly putting it out of our minds for fear of being flagged for unusual behaviour by the AI powered surveillance state, and getting a visit from the thought police.
The downvotes are from people who know full well that Facebook and Whatsapp have voice calling, but still insist on using traditional calls because they are a) more reliable and b) aren't being slurped by Facebook to build a dataset for the next robo-caller AI.
We prefer that only GCHQ gets to spy on us, with their low-tech wire-tapping systems that they installed at Vodafone et al a decade or three ago, which only records people they are already interested in, rather than -everyone-.
Unfortunately Adam, I don't think the government really cares THAT much about the 'bad guys' :(
What governments REALLY worry about are the masses. If people en-masse got angry, they could make themselves a completely new government.
If some 'bad guy' blows up a hundred, or even a thousand people, it's not really a problem for a government, in the grand scheme of things. It may even help them, by keeping the masses afraid of such things and persuade them to give up some of their freedoms.
The kinds of people who do mass surveillance are only interested in the software used by the masses, i.e. facebook and whatsapp (at the moment).. If you went and used some third-party app that implemented the Signal protocol but didn't pass on your keystrokes to GCHQ, then you would perhaps be flagged on some watch-list or learning system for being an 'abnormal' person, but really they are not that interested in you unless you can communicate with millions of people..
No, the last two do not apply to these jokers. All of those bullet points come under the heading:
Terrorism is a violent action that:
IANAL, but this reads to me that they must all be "violent actions". If there is no violence, or at least wanton destruction, then it can't be "terrorism".
- Interferes with or seriously disrupts an electronic system
e.g. blowing up subsea internet cables in the Bristol Channel or deliberately dragging an anchor to destroy them. (I worry about this sort of thing bringing the UK to a standstill at some point.. No more "cloud"! Most big shops can't even take Cash without the Internet.)
- Creates a serious risk to the public’s health and safety
e.g. throwing caltrops or burning bin bags off of motorway bridges. The M25 turns into a car park with just one breakdown.. Imagine the chaos someone could cause deliberately.
Whereas this drone, if there even was a drone, was just flying somewhere in the vicinity of an airport, probably minding its own business. It's illegal, due to the proximity to the airport, but not "terrorism" by a long shot. The only "terror" was caused by the media and airport management when they shut the whole place down at Christmas on a knee-jerk!
TBH, all of this sounds to me like an excuse to "crack down" on drones in general, because the government sees them as a hazard. I think Mrs. May would like all of them banned except for her own
manhacks authorised police drones.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020