If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#661
|
|||
|
|||
Two questions
On 27/09/2015 16:12, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2015-09-27 05:15, David Taylor wrote: [] With the DVB-S (previous) version of the system, the satellite data comes in 185-byte packets (IIRC), each of which needs to be stored. The packets are not repeated, so if you miss one you loose data. This could be for a 60 MB file, so lots and lots of writes. Hence the RAMdisk as a buffer. That's a good approach. I assume a UPS in there and other power backups. I process a lot of GPS data (or was doing so a year or so ago) and I would have single strings of raw data in memory approaching 100 MB or so before processing and consolidation. (they came from a lot of separate recordings). The final processing (reduction) would output to disk. The professional stations would likely have UPS, but most amateurs would not bother. If you are writing the software you can indeed have more control over things like buffering, but in this case we have two releases of executable image for Windows-32 (and others for Linux variants), so it's a matter of working out how to configure the OS to meet the needs of the software whilst at the same time reducing or eliminating missed DVB-S2 packets of data. A lot of work has gone into this optimisation over the past 12 years or so! At least now having a few GB of RAMdisk isn't the drain on system resources it was back in 2003. -- Cheers, David Web: http://www.satsignal.eu |
#662
|
|||
|
|||
Two questions
In article , Alan Browne
wrote: Sorkin got publicity for the movie it was because Cook gave him the opportunity to do so. It can be claimed that Cook was being a mediawhore because Apple has this new product release going on. You may have noticed. Cook called Sorkin an opportunist. I don't see how that draws attention to Apple's product releases. (And Cook may be many things, but media whore is not on that list. Whereas the likes of Sorkin depend on promotion to make back their investment in their movies. Apple on the other hand don't need to do anything to attract the media - the media are hooked on Apple and everyone else is very simply envious to worse). cook did not single out sorkin. cook called everyone who is capitalizing on the death of steve jobs an opportunist: I think that a lot of people are trying to be opportunistic and I hate that, itıs not a great part of our world I really have nothing against Sorkin - he makes good movies. Whether they are accurate or not is another matter. (Charlie Wilson's War is definitely high on my list as are "A Few Good Men" and "Moneyball" - also enjoyed the series "The West Wing".) But - like all in the "Hollywood game" you don't get publicity by being quiet and the standard of truth is lower than that in a US presidential party nomination season. yep. |
#663
|
|||
|
|||
Two questions
In article , Alan Browne
wrote: This exchange of attacks only has traction in this newsgroup because Apple is involved. If Carly Fiorina (who claims to be a great admirer of Jobs and considers him one of her mentors) had knocked the movie, and Sorkin would have fired back at HP's dismal record under Fiorina no one here would care. Yet, a large number of readers of this group are using an HP product. I don't care about attacks on Apple or Jobs which are based on real truths. Apple has plenty of blemishes. Sorkin's attack on Apple's supplier's labour issues is deflection - esp. given Apple's record of addressing supply chain moral/ethical issues (and many others) over the years. The failure in China is that of the Chinese government. yep. |
#664
|
|||
|
|||
Two questions
On 2015-09-27 12:09, nospam wrote:
In article , Alan Browne wrote: Sorkin got publicity for the movie it was because Cook gave him the opportunity to do so. It can be claimed that Cook was being a mediawhore because Apple has this new product release going on. You may have noticed. Cook called Sorkin an opportunist. I don't see how that draws attention to Apple's product releases. (And Cook may be many things, but media whore is not on that list. Whereas the likes of Sorkin depend on promotion to make back their investment in their movies. Apple on the other hand don't need to do anything to attract the media - the media are hooked on Apple and everyone else is very simply envious to worse). cook did not single out sorkin. cook called everyone who is capitalizing on the death of steve jobs an opportunist: I think that a lot of people are trying to be opportunistic and I hate that, itıs not a great part of our world Timing means a lot. I really have nothing against Sorkin - he makes good movies. Whether they are accurate or not is another matter. (Charlie Wilson's War is definitely high on my list as are "A Few Good Men" and "Moneyball" - also enjoyed the series "The West Wing".) But - like all in the "Hollywood game" you don't get publicity by being quiet and the standard of truth is lower than that in a US presidential party nomination season. yep. |
#665
|
|||
|
|||
Two questions
On 9/26/2015 6:07 PM, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2015-09-26 16:22, PeterN wrote: On 9/26/2015 10:42 AM, Alan Browne wrote: On 2015-09-26 05:08, Eric Stevens wrote: On Sat, 26 Sep 2015 00:00:18 -0400, Tony Cooper wrote: On Sat, 26 Sep 2015 15:45:37 +1200, Eric Stevens wrote: "The Cupertino giant has for months been said to be in talks with major US studios in a bid to secure content for a streaming Apple service. Compensation reportedly remains a sticking point." I don't want to be accused of being an Apple basher, so I won't link to it, but the very recent catfight between Aaron Sorkin and Tim Cook didn't go well for Tim. I hadn't heard of this until you mentioned it. While there are no doubt some children in China assembling phones for 17 cents perhour (and what else might they be doing without that?) the overall quality of iPhones suggests there is a lot of automated assembly in their construction. There's a lot of touch labour at final assembly. As to the child labour that's a failure of those suppliers and the Chinese government who are very lax at enforcement. Lax is an understatement. What is really needed is for sellers in the importing countries to have the moral courage to manufacture in compliant countries, preferably at home. If that were done, iPhone's wouldn't exist. Not so sure. We need a level playing field. Some companies like GE are moving manufacturing back to the US on some large items. Mainly because they save costs in doing so. It works for those items (washer/dryer/dishwasher) for a variety of reasons. That model wouldn't work for small electronics, however. sadly, you are right. My statement is a Utopian dream, in a perfect world.. As to moral courage, China has the policy courage, just not as much enforcement courage. Apple is the 800 Lb gorilla on that and they keep auditors in place and roving around in order to ensure compliance. Despite that there are of course exceptions. And of course there is stalwart VW ... -- PeterN |
#666
|
|||
|
|||
Two questions
On 9/26/2015 6:51 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , PeterN wrote: So one will need the Vividy device built in to their televisions. at which point, a pirate can simply point a camera at the tv. it won't be the best quality but pirates don't give a ****. If the quality is that bad, the pirate will have few customers. wrong. You deny reality. Those who purchase a **** quality repro are not likely to purchase a good quality on, at full price. pirates smuggle cameras into movie theaters to make illicit copies which are then distributed. pirates do the same thing for concerts using audio recorders. the results are about the worst quality possible, especially when someone stands up in front of the person with the camera. You said the worst was making a copy of the flick from a TV. Now the worst is in a movie theater. Which is it. more sophisticated pirates could intercept the video signals going to the lcd display. at *some* point, the movie has to be decrypted so that humans can watch it, at which point, it can be copied. piracy *cannot* be eliminated and crap like vidity only serves to **** off the honest user. You think if you repeat something often enough it will be true. The fact is that piracy CAN be eliminated, but the cost of doing so makes it economically not feasible. it is not possible to eliminate piracy any more than it's possible to eliminate any other crime. it will *never* be zero, ever. it can *only* be reduced to an acceptable level, punishing those *after* they do it, assuming they're even caught at all. You remind me of the credit manager who brags that he has no bad debts. I recommended that he be fired. Management took my advice and profits dramatically increased. what does that have to do with anything? Whoosh you wouldn't be moving the goalposts again, would you? -- PeterN |
#667
|
|||
|
|||
Two questions
On 9/26/2015 7:29 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , PeterN wrote: I hadn't heard of this until you mentioned it. While there are no doubt some children in China assembling phones for 17 cents perhour (and what else might they be doing without that?) the overall quality of iPhones suggests there is a lot of automated assembly in their construction. the same factories make just about every piece of electronics and apple has done more than any other company to improve the situation. but why let facts get in the way. In some cultures everybody is a cannibal, does that make it OK? Since you don't understand subtlety, I will rephrase: Just because "everybody" does something, doesn't make it right. whoosh. IOW you will not admit to being wrong. -- PeterN |
#668
|
|||
|
|||
Two questions
On 2015-09-27 12:19, Tony Cooper wrote:
On Sun, 27 Sep 2015 10:39:51 -0400, Alan Browne wrote: On 2015-09-26 20:45, Tony Cooper wrote: On Sat, 26 Sep 2015 18:11:49 -0400, Alan Browne wrote: On 2015-09-26 11:00, Tony Cooper wrote: On Sat, 26 Sep 2015 10:41:35 -0400, Alan Browne wrote: On 2015-09-26 00:00, Tony Cooper wrote: On Sat, 26 Sep 2015 15:45:37 +1200, Eric Stevens wrote: "The Cupertino giant has for months been said to be in talks with major US studios in a bid to secure content for a streaming Apple service. Compensation reportedly remains a sticking point." I don't want to be accused of being an Apple basher, so I won't link to it, but the very recent catfight between Aaron Sorkin and Tim Cook didn't go well for Tim. Noise. Cook doesn't like how someone has portrayed his deceased friend and says so. Sorkin then pulls a classic deflection accusing Apple of child labour in China as a retort. (And yes, Apple knows some suppliers have underage workers and continues to audit and force change despite this being a failure of the Chinese government to enforce the law.) Sorkin's just doing his job to attract attention to his movie. I dunno about "deflection". Cook called the film "opportunistic", and Sorkin rightly called Cook on claiming that a movie is opportunistic when Apple's business plan is as opportunistic as it comes. See above. What does Apple's manufacturing have to do with Cook's complaint about Sorkin's portrayal of Jobs? So Sorkin attacks Cook and Apple's manufacturing chain. That's deflection. (And poorly too). Interesting that Cook merely complains, but Sorkin attacks. Not much bias here, No Sir. Oh, geez, now you laser analysis is going to the words I use. Christ I am for the gallows. At least allow me a last prayer. Sorkin's SOLE interest is promotion of his film. Once again you demonstrate extreme bias. You are willing to accept that Cook's comments were made by reason of genuine distress over negative portrayal of someone he admired and respected. Yet, you are unwilling to accept that Sorkin reacted in genuine distress over comments denigrating his personal efforts and profession. Instead, you attribute his reaction to selfish reasons. You betcha word choice plays into this. Cook chose a very inflammatory word to describe the movie(s). Had Cook not chosen such an inflammatory word, and just said he objected to the way Jobs is presented in the movie(s), the Sorkin might not have responded angrily. Parse it as you like Tony. Snip it too. |
#669
|
|||
|
|||
Two questions
On Sun, 27 Sep 2015 10:25:07 -0400, Alan Browne
wrote: On 2015-09-26 19:06, Eric Stevens wrote: On Sun, 20 Sep 2015 18:39:49 -0400, Alan Browne wrote: On 2015-09-20 18:09, Eric Stevens wrote: On Sun, 20 Sep 2015 10:07:08 -0400, Alan Browne wrote: On 2015-09-20 04:38, Eric Stevens wrote: On Sun, 20 Sep 2015 17:02:38 +1200, Eric Stevens wrote: On Sun, 20 Sep 2015 00:28:48 -0400, nospam wrote: In article , Eric Stevens wrote: I can't imagine Apple building 4K machines which will not handle vidity. In that case they are limited to whoever can provide Crypto Management hardware. who said anything about building 4k machines? They already do. See https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT202856 just the other day you said you can't imagine they'll make a 4k machine without vidity and now you point it out. you're also confusing connecting a 4k display with playing protected content. they are two different things. No I'm not. I'm saying a 4K machine without Vidity capability will be handicapped in the market. also, a processor transition has nothing to do with any of that. It's got to work in with Crypto Manager which is not just software but hardware. See the diagram on http://www.rambus.com/key-issuance-center/ Apple's DRM system has been doing a similar function for years so that a users various devices can play paid-for content. That includes "owned" content and "rented" content. The only problem is such a system is open to side-channel attacks [ see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Side-channel_attack ] and hence is not really secure. The Crptomanager is implimented in dedicated hardware and is the current state of the art. In creating Vidity the entertainment industry seems to have gone all-out to build the most resistant system they could. Every transaction will need it's own unique key. That appears to include copying from a server disk. All of this, of course, transparent to the end user. Apple's DRM requires unique keys for each instance of distribution. Please find me evidence of a successful attack on Apple's DRM model. If Apple do adopt Vividity and that requires hardware based crypto to do so, then I don't think they'd have much trouble with it - Apple have been doing that as well (esp. in devices with Secure Enclave). I hadn't intended to continue with this but I have just been directed to http://www.investorvillage.com/smbd....g&mid=15326500 which led me to https://edwardsnowden.com/2015/03/10...-a4-processor/ or http://tinyurl.com/pr4jzue and Evil maid dependent. Not necessarily. You could go out and buy a new iPhone and crack away at it to extract the GID key which seems to be common to all iPhones. In any case, evil maids aen't that hard to get if the target is sufficiently important. Probably much easier to find than is the task of cracking the key. http://www.macworld.com/article/2895...e-devices.html or http://tinyurl.com/ow84594 "attempts" "possible methods" "if successful" All unsuccessful attempts by high funded government agencies desperate to invade privacy. Not pirate movies. This is why over the past year various agencies (esp. the FBI and NSA) have been clamoring for split-key escrow or other back door access to personal devices. Apple seems to have been working with NXP for a number of years with a variety of devices. NXP is a licensee of Cryptography Research. It's anyone's guess what is really going on. See also "Based on Apple documents I have seen, when Apple introduced Apple Pay they largely execute that financial transaction using an external NXP chip which has an embedded secure element. Given that NXP has licensed Rambuss DPA countermeasures, it would appear NXP secure elements are protected from DPA hacking." "external chip" - eg: Any chipset can be made to work with NXP (or any other security module. -- Regards, Eric Stevens |
#670
|
|||
|
|||
Two questions
On Sun, 27 Sep 2015 15:27:39 -0400, PeterN
wrote: On 9/26/2015 6:07 PM, Alan Browne wrote: On 2015-09-26 16:22, PeterN wrote: On 9/26/2015 10:42 AM, Alan Browne wrote: On 2015-09-26 05:08, Eric Stevens wrote: On Sat, 26 Sep 2015 00:00:18 -0400, Tony Cooper wrote: On Sat, 26 Sep 2015 15:45:37 +1200, Eric Stevens wrote: "The Cupertino giant has for months been said to be in talks with major US studios in a bid to secure content for a streaming Apple service. Compensation reportedly remains a sticking point." I don't want to be accused of being an Apple basher, so I won't link to it, but the very recent catfight between Aaron Sorkin and Tim Cook didn't go well for Tim. I hadn't heard of this until you mentioned it. While there are no doubt some children in China assembling phones for 17 cents perhour (and what else might they be doing without that?) the overall quality of iPhones suggests there is a lot of automated assembly in their construction. There's a lot of touch labour at final assembly. As to the child labour that's a failure of those suppliers and the Chinese government who are very lax at enforcement. Lax is an understatement. What is really needed is for sellers in the importing countries to have the moral courage to manufacture in compliant countries, preferably at home. If that were done, iPhone's wouldn't exist. Not so sure. We need a level playing field. There is no such thing, and never will be until the entropy death of the universe. Some companies like GE are moving manufacturing back to the US on some large items. Mainly because they save costs in doing so. It works for those items (washer/dryer/dishwasher) for a variety of reasons. That model wouldn't work for small electronics, however. sadly, you are right. My statement is a Utopian dream, in a perfect world.. How do you get on with the moral burden of depriving tens of thousands of people of their only source of living? There are two sides to all of these things. As to moral courage, China has the policy courage, just not as much enforcement courage. Apple is the 800 Lb gorilla on that and they keep auditors in place and roving around in order to ensure compliance. Despite that there are of course exceptions. And of course there is stalwart VW ... I remember when Chrysler did much the same kind of thing back in the 70s with their 6 cylinder engines in Australia. -- Regards, Eric Stevens |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
After the Deletion of Google Answers U Got Questions Fills the Gap Answering and Asking the Tough Questions | Linux Flash Drives | Digital Photography | 0 | May 7th 07 06:38 PM |
Questions on Canon 300D and etc. questions regarding digital photography | David J Taylor | Digital Photography | 10 | March 24th 05 05:18 PM |
Questions on Canon 300D and etc. questions regarding digital photography | Progressiveabsolution | Digital Photography | 4 | March 24th 05 04:11 PM |
Questions on Canon 300D and etc. questions regarding digitalphotography | Matt Ion | Digital Photography | 3 | March 24th 05 02:57 PM |
First SLR questions | Rick | Digital Photography | 26 | August 8th 04 12:19 AM |