video compression [geek thread]

by **Miles** » November 3rd, 2003, 12:51 pm

They've been saying it's just around the corner for 5 years. Sure they'll release it Adam. Hey marc, Tim was right, you should give them some of your money, because technology like this must be worth millions

by **Adam** » November 3rd, 2003, 12:55 pm

Me? I don't believe in this crap ffs.

by **marc** » November 3rd, 2003, 2:42 pm

it's a geek thread - who invited miles ?

by **Clayton** » November 5th, 2003, 11:06 pm

the wi-fi antenna is unplugged

um...dude...I could get a wifi card to work with no antenna plugged in too. Get them to take the card out.

by **Tim** » November 6th, 2003, 8:09 am

Bwahaha, Marc, you made Dans Data

by **Adam** » November 6th, 2003, 8:13 am

To save lazy Tim four seconds of work, here's the link. Keyword search for 'miles'.

by **Miles** » November 6th, 2003, 8:16 am

by **marc** » November 6th, 2003, 12:46 pm

great - just what i needed.

there was no wireless card in the machines - in those apples the wi-fi card is in the form of a pcmcia card on the motherboard, and they had been removed.

by **Clayton** » November 6th, 2003, 3:56 pm

It's ok marc, the more publicity they get the sooner they will be exposed as frauds.

by **Clayton** » November 6th, 2003, 4:04 pm

marc, what was the video of? If there was almost no movement whatsoever in the video it may be possible. BUT...I can get 20+ hours of DVD quality video into 200k or so with no movement. It's called a jpeg. :roll:

by **Clayton** » November 6th, 2003, 4:10 pm

Sorry for the threee posts in a row but I just hate seeing people get the wool pulled over there eyes. Think about it. Flash uses more bandwidth than that and all it does is draw lines and rectangles and circles etc. It's not possible dude. Well maybe with some sort of weird Quantum effect that won't be invented for 50 years (theres some weird shit out there, take time travel for instance :wink:

)

by **marc** » November 6th, 2003, 4:22 pm

the video was of waterworld, charlie's angels, and some other aussie movie.

i'm holding my tongue and reserving my judgement at the moment.

Let's just say that at the start i refused to believe it. Now i'm not sure.

by **Miles** » November 6th, 2003, 4:53 pm

There's a physical limit to how much info you can pack in there. Think about all the pixels, all the different colours, the sound as well - how can you pack that into just 87 bytes? What sort of mathematical algorithm could you possibly use? They're saying you can stuff a DVD quality movie down a 19200 baud modem.

It's quite literally simply impossible.

by **marc** » November 6th, 2003, 4:54 pm

no its not. and who said anything about 87 bytes ?

by **nadnerb** » November 6th, 2003, 5:36 pm

sounds like bullshit, a dvd on a floppy disc?!

ask them if you can use your own computer and harddrive.

the guy lives near me, i might go and ask him to give me a demo *_*

by **Miles** » November 6th, 2003, 6:22 pm

marc: you did.

TV quality video, with almost no artefacts, and a high quality stereo soundtrack... 20 minutes of it... in a 2.5MB file.

That's 87 bytes per frame. Pay attention.

by **Miles** » November 6th, 2003, 6:23 pm

Er, and how is that not impossible? How are you going to define so much data with such a small amount to begin with? You can't. It's like the places who reckon they're getting 10-100:1 compression ratios on random data - yeah, right.

by **marc** » November 6th, 2003, 9:48 pm

Miles wrote:marc: you did.

TV quality video, with almost no artefacts, and a high quality stereo soundtrack... 20 minutes of it... in a 2.5MB file.

That's 87 bytes per frame. Pay attention.

No-one ever said that the entire of every frame was included in the file.

Stop reading into things.

by **Miles** » November 7th, 2003, 5:36 am

It's still an average of 87 bytes per frame. Fuck, have you got a memory of a goldfish? We just went over this.

by **Adam** » November 7th, 2003, 6:50 am

And remember kids:

marc wrote:GUYS, I KNOW !!!!!!

I didn't believe it either...

by **Adam** » December 23rd, 2003, 10:30 am

So what happened with this, Marc?

by **marc** » December 23rd, 2003, 10:41 am

thanks to miles sending the entire thread to dan's data and it getting to way more people than i had intended, i'm not talking about it on here anymore...

it was MEANT to be a way of getting some clever ideas amongst some geeks that would help me with my due diligence, but instead it because a bunch of people offering their fucking stupid doubts and generally being fuckwits.

then the fact that it went to so many more people caused issues because it was no longer me sound-checking it with my friends anymore, and i don't want to jeopardise the trust of the company that owns the technology.

especially when i wasn't getting anything other than
people expressing their doubts - somthing i could do more than well enough on my own.

So now i know better than turning to you guys for some sensible and helpful advice. i wont do it again.

by **Milligna** » December 23rd, 2003, 10:45 am

My ball. Taken home.

by **Michael** » December 23rd, 2003, 12:12 pm

If it's for real, start the stream, then disconnect the modem cable and see how long it takes to fuck up.

Or better yet, fly into orbit and nuke them from space. It's the only way to be sure.

by **Adam** » December 23rd, 2003, 12:14 pm

Settle Marc, I just wanted to know whether it was real or not. You said you were going to do some tests and checks.

video compression [geek thread]

Who is online