9999

"For example, a 720p movie transmitting in HEVC will only require 600 Kbps to crisply stream, a connection speed drastically lower than the current average of 4.5 Mbps."

Utter nonsense. The statement is phrased so it appears that they are comparing the same video quality, when in reality, the best h.265 encoders will probably only reduce 720p file size (for a given quality) by around 30% vs. x264 encoded h.264.

I do at least applaud the author for mentioning that hardware decoder support is a ways off, but the citations he offers for actual decoder support are very light on details. I seriously doubt we'll see hardware h.265 decoding support in even half of newly marketed devices 2 years from now. Nevermind the heavily entrenched existing install base that Netflix will still be servicing. Software decoding h.265 will make a top of the line CPU scream right now.

And then there's the problem that encoding h.265 takes about 40 times as long as h.264 which is hardly negligible but he just cursorily tosses off. His conclusion is what really annoys me though:

"Despite these challenges, major ISPs working together with Netflix to adapt its massive library into a data-friendly format is a better long-term solution for every party involved."

Just how exactly will the US ISPs be involved here? Are they going to rent out a few thousand EC2 instances and re-encode all of that content? No. Are they going to donate substantial sums of money to x265 or any other effort to develop encoders? No. Are they going to provide R&D funds to Qualcomm, Intel, Nvidia, etc. to hasten the development of hardware decoders? Of course they won't. They will do what they have always done: They will leverage the network duopoly they've been handed by the US Government. They will never make good on their commitment to build out a 45mbps/45mbps symmetrical network connection to every end user that US tax payers paid for, and they will rely on actual innovators to compensate for their lazy, unethical and greedy business model. The truth is that HEVC is not primarily intended to make 720p content cheaper to move about, it's intended to make 4K and 8K content streaming possible given the wretched recalcitrance of US network providers.

What he forgot to add was the crucial fourth term: the "unknown knowns," the things we don't know that we know-which is precisely, the Freudian unconscious, the "knowledge which doesn't know itself," as Lacan used to say.

If Rumsfeld thinks that the main dangers in the confrontation with Iraq were the "unknown unknowns," that is, the threats from Saddam whose nature we cannot even suspect, then the Abu Ghraib scandal shows that the main dangers lie in the "unknown knowns" - the disavowed beliefs, suppositions and obscene practices we pretend not to know about, even though they form the background of our public values."

http://www.lacan.com/zizekrumsfeld.htm

I agree with Zizek's assessment that unknown knowns are even more dangerous than unknown unknowns.

1) It's hard to find people that have production experience with Erlang 2) The perception is that batteries are not included (even in comparison with Go... if you have some information to refute that notion I would be more than happy to learn more)

HLS support on Android is incredibly spotty. Do you mean in-app HLS support? The Android Chrome browser doesn't support it at all, and only a select few versions of the regular Android browser support it. Then again, there's not a great alternative.

Why offer the multiple bitrates on the HLS stream at all? You know what the client's bandwidth is, why perform three separate live transcodes? Is this because you're delivering the stream to an iOS app and Apple requires that? In Safari or a UIWebkitView based app you probably wouldn't have to do that... Or is it to compensate for potential bandwidth fluctuations?

You mentioned the mpeg-ts segmenter in more recent versions of ffmpeg but also mentioned that it has unacceptably high latency. I have not found this to be the case so long as you set the segment times individually and force new keyframes at given times (-force_key_frames and -segment_times flags, otherwise the segmenter ignores your segment time option and just creates TS chunks at whatever frequency it wants to).

Pre-transcoding the first few seconds is a really great approach that I had never considered before. Very cool.

I'm not at all a fan of facebook, but the design here is really solid and the marketing sells it quite well. I wonder if the Instagram team worked on this.

I remember howling with laughter at his anti-mac articles more than a decade ago, and this is funny for the same reason. Dvorak has always been utterly incapable of thinking from any perspective other than his own. For example, his hatred of the full screen mode for applications is almost certainly born from being a power user with a multi-monitor setup or a large hi-res display (that's how I see things too, but I also understand that the UI needs to work on things like a Surface or an ultrabook). Oh well, it was fun reading him again anyway.

As many other people have pointed out here, the main thing MS needs to fix is the pricing point and the ridiculous number of options. It's an OS, stop with the Ultimate Edition nonsense and just sell one version of it at the lowest price point that works.

Cringely's claim is that various subsidies and tax breaks, totaling 200 billion dollars, were given to telco operators with the understanding that a 45 mbps symmetrical connection would be developed and offered to end users. The companies received those subsidies and tax breaks, but didn't develop the system they claimed they would develop and instead built a system that is nearly 27 times slower (I use the term built loosely there since the ADSL network sits on top of the same old copper wire infrastructure that has existed for decades and decades).

Morality is the wrong word to use. It is also highly subjective. Whose morality is this guy even talking about? What does it mean to increase morality? Mencken again:

"Immorality is the morality of those who are having a better time. You will never convince the average farmer's mare that the late Maud S. was not dreadfully immoral."

There was a a period about 8 years ago when the LAPD and CHP waged an aggressive campaign against automobile drivers that failed to yield the right of way to pedestrians (including jaywalkers). Going after pedestrians (that are actually using crossswalks, but are just entering them after the don't walk countdown starts), seems like a shift in policy against pedestrians. The greater threat by far to life and well-being for citizens here are drivers that don't yield to pedestrians.

Of course, pursuing that sort of policy would be to the benefit of the majority of Los Angelusians, and the LAPD's general purpose is not to do anything of the kind.

http://www.cs.usfca.edu/~galles/visualization/Algorithms.htm...

Let's assume that they are all shiftless, white, dreadlocked, trustafarians. They are not representing themselves as being OF that population of poor minorities but rather are advocating FOR the population of underrepresented, poor minorities. How then are they different than wealthy benefactors donating to AIDS relief or anti-malarial programs in Africa? Well, they are donating their time, not their money, but if they do have so much money one wonders why they wouldn't simply donate that... You also make the observation that the individuals that are actually being negatively effected by gentrification in West Oakland are off working on their second or third jobs at that hour of the day, then wouldn't they need someone that is in a more comfortable position to advocate on their behalf?

It's interesting that you ask me for some empirical, measured data on the ethnic and class background of Occupiers. Because of the nature of that movement, it's nearly impossible to pin them down on anything. I was an observer at many Occupy events elsewhere, however, and what I found was very deep suspicion of anyone not directly involved in planning, so I'm afraid that it would be basically impossible to conduct the kind of research you're talking about. I was not involved with Occupy Oakland, but I know a few people who were, and interestingly enough, they had some of the same problems with other activists that you have. I do not think you are entirely wrong there. Certainly, some of the people that got involved just wanted to smoke weed, make idiotic signs, chant slogans and get laid, but it's ludicrous to suggest that the majority of activists involved there were of that ilk. It would also be ludicrous to suggest that there weren't any pseudo-activists. They were certainly there.

Personally, I found the Occupy movement's organizational non-structure to be self-defeating and it's no surprise that it has almost completely fizzled out. I also find the tactics being used by these particular protesters to be somewhat wrong-headed. In your original post though, you showed absolute disgust for these people and and in my own experience, they don't all deserve it. It will be interesting to find out more about what actually happened at this protest.

I would much rather see these protesters target the real source of the housing crisis in the bay area rather than the much more convenient target that large tech companies represent. Although I do think Google's Eloy buses are pretty repugnant and they would be viewed more favorably if they contributed something to public transit. So why don't these protesters start showing up to city council meetings, or at property management companies, etc.? Target the landlords and the politicians. It's obviously not in the tech companies' best interests to have to pay their workers inflated wages just because the greedy landlords keep jacking up rent prices.

EDIT:

I was mistaken regarding the comment coming from the Longview rep, it's actually from the Union President. When viewed in full, his opinion seems to be more nuanced than simply "closing the port is bad."

http://www.ilwu40.org/docs/12-06-11-McEllrath%20Letter.pdf

The longshoremen's union supported the Occupy shutdown, but were contractually obligated not to participate in the protest. Source:

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/occupy-oakland-shuts-down-port/

Since almost everything else you said is anecdotal, it's hard for me to respond to, but your statement about the longshoremen, that's certainly wrong.

In general, the people that you are deriding and caricaturing represent the first wave of gentrification, and those people actually do make meaningful contributions to the areas they move into. Think of the excellent restaurants, concert venues, boutiques, bars, etc. that exist in Oakland now--that's first wave gentrification. Those people are also historically more aware of their surroundings and the culture that they are moving into and tend to show solidarity with the lower income residents that they are paving the way towards displacement for. On the other hand, the second wave of gentrifiers tends to dramatically increase the cost of living, rate of displacement, and tends to care very little about the plight of their fellow citizens.

The Google buses are a convenient symbol for economic disparity though, and I often wonder why Google doesn't try to do a real public works project instead of simply creating a segregated system of buses. Why not add wi-fi to public buses? Why not extend the light rail system into the valley? Why not donate a whole lot of money to a public mental health project so there aren't so many deranged lunatics screaming on public transit? If they did that, then they will have created a more comfortable environment not only for their own employees, but for the entire community.

Looks like an interesting tool though.

EDIT: After searching around for a while, I discovered a few promising leads to make this happen. The first option is more of a wall mounted solution, but could be repurposed for separating a workspace: http://www.dirtt.net/public/products/breathe_2013.php It is also apparently very easy to train Ivy to climb up wires, assuming you have a lot of natural light, it seems like it would be possible to replicate something like this indoors: http://www.apartmenttherapy.com/look-modern-ivy-8702

The selection was somewhat mediocre compared to what you would find in a real grocery store. The quality of produce was good, while the quality of the meat was mediocre. The selection of wine and beer was abysmal (wine and beer were made available through a third party, but they seemed to have a very limited selection). The pricing was also considerably higher than what you would find at a supermarket and just slightly lower than Whole Foods (while the quality was not nearly as good...). They seemed unable to meet the demand for certain items (La Brea bakery bread for example), and in two separate orders they just didn't send some items.

I realized with the first order that you really need to do the in person delivery since you'll be stuck with a bunch of giant box/bag things full of frozen water bottles cluttering up your residence unless you return them to the delivery person. They encourage you to tip the delivery person as well, which I find annoying. If I'm already paying $220 for this additional service, why don't Amazon pay them a decent wage? In the end, I just don't order enough groceries to justify the $220 a year it costs.