Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:No. (Score 1) 499

Yeah, I put an RCA connector on a bracket in which I made a somewhat correct hole, and I soldered a shielded 4 pins - 2 connector to it (sometimes the pinout is 3 or 4 pins with 2 used). It's been with me for quite a while.

My current motherboard is this one: GIGABYTE GA-Z87X-D3H . The audio chip is supposed to be able to do DTS, but I can't find any driver. Feel free to email me if you have any extraneous information :)

Comment: Re:No. (Score 1) 499

I'm talking 60 feet of wire here to my large multi-zone amplifier. I purchased a (shielded) 100' coaxial cable for 5$ in 2004 to connect to my previous amplifier and that has been working wonder. I had to solder myself an output so I could use this connection on the computers that don`t have a direct coax output but only pins. Sadly, they don't always have the DTS/DDL support.

Neither the DS or DSX has a direct coaxial plug. I would still need to use my custom made bracket to plug it on the spdif pin output. Both of them have the DTS connect so I'd go with the lower priced. I still find 60$ simply for DTS encoding to be a steep step as it would not get used much - mostly playing music from here.

Perhaps someday I`ll find what I need -- simple encoding card, or I might move up to HDMI 2.0 someday.

Comment: Re:No. (Score 3, Interesting) 499

Onboard sound is fine, but a lot of motherboard don't have support for creating dolby digital live output. In fact, I am currently in the market for a lowly priced card that would do just this. For once I could simply move my card to the next computer, no matter which motherboard it is.

Is there a correctly priced (30$ perhaps ?) sound card that only do optical and coaxial output, with dolby digital live support ? We have very good surround received, I see no reason not to use those DAC and power amplifier with our nice speakers to get the sound out.

No I don't want to use HDMI; the video feed cause problem, and my monitors are too high res for hdmi anyway (not 2.0, but they don't support it either).

Comment: Re:Question... -- ? (Score 1, Informative) 215

by PIBM (#47332635) Attached to: Exploiting Wildcards On Linux/Unix

Are you running commands, with root on stuff you don't know where it comes from ?

If you absolutely have to go run the query in the folder into which someone has upload/file creation, then at least use ./* if the tool doesn't support --.

This is not an issue if you work recursively on the directory holding whatever they want, which should cover most of the situations. A bad admin can run queries that are as dangerous or worst pretty fast!

Always be cautious when running someone else shell script, that's even more dangerous..

Comment: Re:but (Score 1) 191

by PIBM (#47149227) Attached to: Patent Troll Ordered To Pay For the Costs of Fighting a Bad Patent

This was a `no subvention` development on the south shore of the St-Lawrence river near Quebec city. In this case, the total permits costs had to cover the full extent of the development costs of the land. Typically, they would absorb the costs on your property taxes over the years, thus showing a much smaller amount.

Comment: Re:but (Score 1) 191

by PIBM (#47148615) Attached to: Patent Troll Ordered To Pay For the Costs of Fighting a Bad Patent

Well, large high class development often have higher costs for those parameters. You have much less houses per linear foot of frontage, increasing the cost of bringing water, taking sewer out, and building roads. That area was rocky and had a lot of slope, thus it was easy to understand that the development costs were high, and the city can't be building this without making it back.

The promoter who was selling the plots was also the only one allowed to build in the area; or rather, he would not sell a plot of land if you weren't signing for the house at the same time.

I built my house in a regular development zone, still 6000 square meters of land, and the total permit cost was around 200$ CAD at that time (tree clearing, house, underground electricity, drinking water, sewage and pool permits)

Comment: Re:but (Score 3, Informative) 191

by PIBM (#47147121) Attached to: Patent Troll Ordered To Pay For the Costs of Fighting a Bad Patent

Actual specification for that area was, in 2008, 8000 to 9000 square meters per plot; 95$ per square meter of lot size plus 150$ per square meter of habitation for the construction permit. Other requirements were two stories, full masonry, hidden garage entrance and no roof slopes at less than 12-12.

Needless to say we went somewhere else.. having had that kind of money I really would have liked to build at that place though.

If money can't buy happiness, I guess you'll just have to rent it.