how do you get a patent awarded on something that has already been released as "open source" (Hadoop)
This does not add up, either Hadoop is not really open source, or US patent office are as FCKING stupid as EVERYONE seems to think they are.
Come on people, don't you get tired of the shame of working for such an organization....don't you want to see freedom and democracy restored to the world..?>?>
They = ICANN, the body legally responsible for yanking the license of a domain name registrar if they don't react quickly to this kind of BS.
SOMEONE has to first complain and ask the DomainName Registrar to revoke the domain name, if they don't comply then SOMEONE has to complain to ICANN.
So first SOMEONE has to change to real living person willing to register the complaint (should fall to the first person who finds themselves infected).
ICANN can be slow, but it has revoke Domain Name Registrar licenses and can do so pretty much at will.
I digitized my CD collection to 320kbps.
I ran similar tests audio tests using quality component stereo set-up (speakers/amp), and just playing on the PC ($80 audigy zx card)over a $80 5.1 surround Logitech speakers. I also used good pair of over-ear (muffs)headphones.
I used a variety of different music to test with (metal, jazz, rap, classical, pop, etc) the majority were off the shelf music CDs, one was a DDD (all digital) Gold disc of Pink Floyd's Dark Side of the Moon. I used mostly songs we would have heard in different situations and were familiar with/ It had 5 test subjects including myself for the fuller tests, and ran a few follow up tests with about a dozen people.
The results:
192kbps was good enough for the majority on most songs. Going back and forth you could tell a difference on some songs, and on the component stereo system, no one could really tell the difference @ 192.
The good pair of headphones was better at revealing the differences - 192 more consistently given a worse rating than a straight play back from the original CD.
Everyone agreed that on pretty much any equipment 128kbps sounded noticeably worse (though they would still enjoy the music).
The magic line was 256kbps.
At this rate no one was able to discern any difference between the original or the ripd mp3.
Everyone agreed they both sounded like it should, no real distortion, or "sound" to the music, just the music itself.
I got similar results for 320kbps. No one could tell the difference. (I would say there was even a preference for the 320 over the original format, but it could have been test bias)
A very large CD collection will fit in 100GB at 320kbps, and sounds great!
I would recommend backing up your collection at at least 256, or better 320 (not much more space)
Best of all, the files will play on pretty much any computer or audio player as is.
If I want a CD for non-mp3 (real CD player), I can spit one out, that no-one could tell the difference from the original on.
Modeling paged and segmented memories is tricky business. -- P.J. Denning