Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:First grab (Score 2) 157

by dotwhynot (#48978971) Attached to: Major Record Labels Keep 73% of Spotify Payouts

I don't understand this analysis. Why are you showing "profit" as being equal to gross for some stakeholders (Composers, writers, performers), but as only 5% of gross for others (labels and platforms)? And, furthermore, what's up with "estimating" the profit margin at a single number, and then applying that same number to two very different operations (labels vs. platforms)? That looks quite strange.

The whole focus on "share of profit" in this scenario is one big misdirection. It is of no interest what profit record labels have if their cost level is out of control vs their income and value. The record labels need to seriously adapt their cost levels to a new reality. They've had an extreme golden age in the decades of the CD, but now reality is different, as it was before.

Comment: Re:I'm amazed (Score 1) 169

by dotwhynot (#48740863) Attached to: How Long Will It Take Streaming To Dominate the Music Business?

I jsut don't get why all the people that will make streaming more popular than downloading are ignoring the obvious downsides of streaming vs. local storage: 1) You can't listen to your music when you dont have an active internet connection.

On Spotify you easily can and I do it all the time, just mark your playlist as offline.

2) You're basically paying regularly/multiple times to hear the same music you could just pay for/download once.

Well, yeah, but the sum of what I pay for my music use is so much lower than with downloads and CDs, so why does that matter? And as a bonus I have no monetary reasons to limit discovery of new music, explore shared playlists, let friends add whatever they like to the playlist when they are over, etc.

Comment: Re:Can't DRM or Root Kit Vinyl (Score 1) 278

by dotwhynot (#48721679) Attached to: Vinyl's Revival Is Now a Phenomenon On Both Sides of the Atlantic

Yeah, but if you copy vinyl onto any other medium you risk losing that warm, rich sound you get from telling other hipsters how fragrant your farts smell.

Although you were going for funny, the evidence (double blind tests + science) is that the warm rich analogue sound from LP carries perfectly over to digital recordings when ripped from LP source. Because it is an artifact of LP medium technical limitations and playback distortions, perfectly captured by digital reproductions.

Comment: Re:Sounds Better? (Score 3, Interesting) 433

by dotwhynot (#48593933) Attached to: Vinyl Record Pressing Plants Struggle To Keep Up With Demand

I don't have a horse in either race, but I'm curious - Have any blind studies been done to determine if vinyl does indeed sound better? My audiophile father-in-law would tell you HD-CD sounds better than vinyl, but I don't have the ears to tell either way...

Yes. These are from my days of reading high-end hi-fi magazines that don't have the content online, so I don't have links, but one of the more definitive double blind studies proved that people who claimed they preferred the LP sound over CD (including both "golden ear" audiophiles and professional sound people) indeed were able to reliably identify and prefer the LP sound in controlled double blind experiments. But, when the same experiment compared with CD-R recorded from LP as source, they were not able to identify the difference at all. CD-R from LP as source was equally preferred over CD as LP.

This corresponds exactly with the science of the technical characteristics of the two technologies, signal theory and human hearing. The "warm, analogue" LP sound carried perfectly over to the CD-R, as it is distortion characteristics of LP playback that CD is perfectly able to replicate (Nyquist theorem).

HDCD is a different discussion. I was myself a HDCD supporter in my (luckily now behind me) audiophile days. But HDCD mainly sounded better because the mastering was better, not because of technical specs of the format. HDCD productions took greater care with quality of mastering, not at least avoiding the overuse of dynamic compression.

Comment: What browser apps need.. (Score 5, Insightful) 195

by dotwhynot (#48177553) Attached to: JavaScript and the Netflix User Interface to not have a backspace ruin everything you just did just because you didn't have the focus you thought you had (Chrome!). And to work offline as good as online. Take email as an example. I really like using travel time to catch up on, reply to and delete email. But often travel time does not have internet access (train, plane). For now, email clients are superior to web email because of this.

Comment: Re:Really? (Score 3, Insightful) 294

by dotwhynot (#48104825) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: An Accurate Broadband Speed Test?

Not really fair to immediately disregard the quality of the WiFi connection. It could be well in excess of the ISP connection.

I have a 40/20 mbps broadband, and independent local non-ISP speed tests give the same result on WiFi as ethernet, around 37-38/18-19 mbps. But, I do agree that if you get shitty results, you should try to rule out that shitty WiFi is the reason.

Comment: Re:can we have ONE non-dumbed down GUI please? (Score 1) 184

by dotwhynot (#47953805) Attached to: KDE's UI To Bend Toward Simplicity

FSVO "smoothly". I question whether you've ever run full-fat Windows 7 on an Atom, especially in situations where antivirus is mandatory.

I've been running "full-fat" Windows 7 on an Atom D510 in my Shuttle XS35GT media center PC for more than 3 years. Still runs fine, with MSE AV always on. Only thing it struggles with is some of the more demanding 1080P video files, 720P is always fine (but this is likely more due to graphic chip than processor).

Comment: Re:So much for the smoke test ... (Score 1) 102

by dotwhynot (#47845013) Attached to: Some Core I7 5960X + X99 Motherboards Mysteriously Burning Up

I take my hat off to the early adopters, the ones on the bleeding edge of anything new that comes out. But, over the years I've learned that if anyone is going to get hurt with the next new thing, it is the early adopters. Me, I wait a while. But I still thank the early adopters that take the risk the rest of us are too gutless to join in.

Thank you, all.

I'm itching to buy a X99 PC build but waiting for exactly this reason. Anybody happen to have any insights on "normal" timing for revised motherboards (rev A/B/C etc.) -- how long it usually takes after launch of a new platform like this before the first minor/major revisions of the motherboards are out?

Comment: Re:Seperate VLAN. (Score 3, Interesting) 106

by dotwhynot (#47735843) Attached to: Securing Networks In the Internet of Things Era

You can buy a router for 200 bucks that can do port by port VLAN or create different Wifi SSIDs that link to different VLANs.

Put all your internet of things stuff on VLAN 2, then setup firewall rules that allow the hub for the internet of things devices to either communicate directly with a control system on VLAN1 or just go out to the internet. If VLAN 2 is compromised... it will not compromise VLAN 1.

What happens when your 200 bucks router is compromised?

Comment: Re:It isn't only Windows 8 (Score 1) 304

That may have been a consideration in the 80s, but it's not a good reason to do so now.

NT3.x was on the right path as a fairly well implemented micro-kernel OS, with graphic subsystem completely in user space. This was changed with NT4 for performance and compatibility reasons. (or, what we asked for, where we=market). There was a reason a lot of us clinged to our NT3.51 and refused to "update", like others cling to Win7 now.

Comment: Re:Ahh yes... (Score 1) 169

by dotwhynot (#37009636) Attached to: World Wide Web Turns 20 Today

Don't we all remember banging away on our 300 baud modem thinking it was FAST No, I remember having a 300 baud modem and thinking it was very slow. You can read faster than 300 baud. I had 300 baud for maybe a year before getting a 1200 baud modem. This was around 1985 or so.

1200 baud was a huge improvement. It still took forever to download a game though. 9600 baud was the first modem I actually thought was "fast".

Just a small nitpick in case you are interested: Baud symbol rate != bitrate. The V.32 9.600 kbit/s modems were 2400 baud. The V.34 33.6 kbit/s modems were 3,429 baud.

Comment: Re:my brother installed some stuff on 3.11 (Score 1) 169

by dotwhynot (#37009268) Attached to: World Wide Web Turns 20 Today

my brother installed some stuff on 3.11 that had what I guess tcp/ip stack(slip probably) and a browser that worked with it, I don't remember it's name but it wasn't netscape for sure and it wasn't trumpet which did the tcp/ip, of that I'm fairly sure. the first real internet was on this one bbs that had early linux connected to internet available for members, later it turned into more of a smalltime isp, moved away from that to different provider for isdn access. why can't web pages be more like they were with around when netscape 2.0 got out? content was king once, not the layout.. also early on, why was everything available for linux so well? realplayers and all - it's like 1995 was the year of linux on desktop.

This might very well have been Spry Internet in a Box. Used it myself, was a very good product at the time. It included a full winsock tcp/ip stack, and AirMosaic browser, in addition to clients for Usenet, Telnet, Gopher, FTP and email.

"Oh what wouldn't I give to be spat at in the face..." -- a prisoner in "Life of Brian"