Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Sound Cards are good enough? (Score 1) 322

But why build a Lamborghini only to put an 8 track player in it

Because a Lambo will do 220mph and you can READILY assimilate the experience and tell the difference from a Volkswagen Beetle doing 90.

For most of the people out there who aren't wanking their audiophile, they can't tell the difference between decent onboard sound and a high end sound card without lots and lots of expensive audio equipment and an oscilloscope.

Comment: Re:No. (Score 1) 322

Maybe with crappy OEM motherboards and stuff from Dell.

Take a look at people who spend between $100-$400 on a motherboard plus for a decent power supply.

Not all that prone to electrical noise.

I'm running a well cable-routed system with 6 large fans in there (including the CPU fan). Electrical noise is basically nill. My audio lines coming out of the box are DEAD SILENT with no distortion detectable by the Mark 1 Ear. And if I need to bust out an oscilloscope to detect it, it's effectively zero.

Comment: Re:No. (Score 1) 322

The /. writeup sounds like audiophile wank to me.

Funny you mention that. Because the entire article IS audiophile wank.

Most of the variance between the aural experience of onboard and that of said SB card can only REALLY be differentiated with specialized audio equipment.

With a Mark 1 Ear (your ear, whatever condition it's in, pristine or blown out from rock concerts or too loud a radio), you're going to be DAMN hard-pressed unless you're also one of those poofy little wankers who spends a year's pay on their sound system and faps over how "good" vinyl sounds compared to CD or DVD audio.

Comment: Re:They have a great fab process (Score 2) 322

Don't forget the RF shielded optical fiber interconnects, for true fidelity at high frequencies, and a mellow bass.

Old and busted. I don't know how you can tolerate listening to the harshness and small sound stage caused by RF shielded optical fiber interconnects that aren't impedance matched as well.

Comment: Re:Not really a surprise.... (Score -1) 160

by roman_mir (#47427609) Attached to: After NSA Spying Flap, Germany Asks CIA Station Chief to Depart

Yes, but also this is a meaningless move by Germany in the real sense of the world, because it is still not demanding that all of its gold is returned by the USA immediately.

Of-course the German central bank authorities decided a couple of weeks back that it is better to pretend that the USA still has German gold and not raise any noise than to make it clear that its gold is gone. Germany requested the USA Fed to return its gold about 2 years ago, USA came out saying that it will return half of the gold within 7 year period but in 2 years only returned 1/100th of what it was supposed to, actually the numbers can be found here. In any case if Germany truly wanted to make a statement it would insist on the return of its gold, with the correct serial numbers on the bars and everything.

If Germany simply wanted to get the gold back it also has a choice of selling the gold in the market and getting dollars back, which the Fed could easily provide by creating them out of thin air as it always does, so that then Germany could buy the gold back in the market (of-course fewer tons could be bought since the prices would go up, but at least it wouldn't be a total loss as it is now). Any of this would be better than a useless symbolic gesture.

Comment: I found this article to be more informative (Score 2) 160

by TubeSteak (#47426743) Attached to: After NSA Spying Flap, Germany Asks CIA Station Chief to Depart

Retaliation for Spying: Germany Asks CIA Official to Leave Country

Initially, there had been talk of a formal expulsion of the CIA employee, who is officially accredited as the so-called chief of station and is responsible for the US intelligence service's activities in Germany. A short time later, the government backpedalled and said it had only recommended that he leave. Although it cannot be compared with a formal explusion, it remains an unfriendly gesture.

On a diplomatic level, it is no less than an earthquake and represents a measure that until Thursday would have only been implemented against pariah states like North Korea or Iran. It also underscores just how deep tensions have grown between Berlin and Washington over the spying affair.

The USA's response has been something along the lines of "you expected us not to conducting traditional spying activities?"

Comment: Re:Lawn Dart Alert! (Score 1) 342

by Talderas (#47426573) Attached to: The Pentagon's $399 Billion Plane To Nowhere

You didn't learn from history either it looks like. Your assessment is... dumb because you're comparing a peace-time program to the development and production of tanks during a war. Not the least of Germany's problems was the air superiority the Allies enjoyed which was being used to pound German industrial facilities day and night (leading to significantly reduced production capacity) and air superiority that, post-Normandy, neutered the usage of armored forces on the western front. Both of those are aspects which permitted the M-4 and T-34 fair far better off than they should have.

Comment: Re:Stop throwing good money after bad. (Score 2) 342

by Talderas (#47426433) Attached to: The Pentagon's $399 Billion Plane To Nowhere

While he's got facts wrong, it is true that had the US maintained it's military level between the world wars, we would have been capable of creating a credible western front far sooner than 2.5 years after Germany declared war on us. That is quite significant because the post-WW2 era would have been drasticly different. It is quite unlikely that the Germans would have cast any more forces against the Allies than they already did. Event would have panned out in relatively similar manner to how it did pan out. Eventually Hitler would have been killed or died, and the western front would have been weakly defended while the eastern front was fought with tooth and nail. That was an ideological difference between the two that prevents the Germans from being willing to surrender German territory to the Soviets and in fact was a hinge that Eisenhower utilized in order to help strongarm a ceasefire out of the German. The Soviet hegemony would have been decidedly smaller as the allied forces would have been able to sweep further westward. Places that were could have taken before the Soviets (Berlin, Prague for example) would have been taken by us which would have drastically changed the post WW2 diplomatic field.

The only way you can say that things wouldn't have been better is if you were rooting for the rise of Soviet style communism and hegemony.

It's hard to judge how maintaining or even a slightly build up between the wars would have impacted the pacific theater.

Power corrupts. And atomic power corrupts atomically.