Red Dawn

[bates2012]

Found a copy on VHS today at a thrift store for a dollar. Watched it
tonight. Dated, but still quite relevant, in my opinion.
Happy 4th of July!
NB

[Gunner Asch]

Wolverines!!!


--
"The danger to America is not Barack Obama but a citizenry
capable of entrusting a man like him with the Presidency.
It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of an
Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense
and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have
such a man for their? president.. Blaming the prince of the
fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of
fools that made him their prince".

[Flint]

One of my all time favorite Swayze films.

--
MFB

[Stormin Mormon]

Cubans, invading the US? What a quaint thought. With Mexicans coming over
the border, and a foreign born Marxist for president. What are the odds of
anything resembling that? Wait till election season, and the Black Panthers
do their voter intimidation routine.

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Wolverines
www.lds.org
.

"Flint" <agen...@section31.org> wrote in message
news:jt1db6$dsu$2...@dont-email.me...

[bates2012]

On Jul 4, 8:32 am, G. Morgan <sealte...@osama-is-dead.net> wrote:

> bates2012 wrote:
> >Found a copy on VHS today at a thrift store for a dollar. Watched it
> >tonight. Dated, but still quite relevant, in my opinion.
>

> Did you have to buy a VCR too?  ;-)

No, I have 2 good VCR's. And a DVD player. But I do need to get me a
Blu-Ray player. Then Ill be good until the next big thing in players
comes around.
NB

[Winston_Smith]

The next big thing is over the web delivery. The studios fantasy -
pay per view. All the studios announced plans a few years ago to
phase out manufacture of disks. If you want to own it, if you want to
be free of the web, buy what you want while you still can.

I don't have blu-ray but a lot of people I know consider the run of
the mill up-converting DVD players to be almost as good. The players,
and especially the disks are much cheaper. I something wonder if
blu-ray wasn't just a scam to escalate the price for a movie. Every
format since 78s has been cheaper to manufacture and deliver and sold
for a lot more.

[bates2012]

On Jul 4, 2:07 pm, Winston_Smith <inva...@butterfly.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Jul 2012 11:42:14 -0700 (PDT), bates2012
>

The only difference I can figure out with blu-ray is theres some
features like a better search function and shit thats better than DVD.
The picture is supposed to be clearer, but my TV's are tubes, so I
dont think that would make much difference for me.
Neighbor girl has Netflix run thru her computer that looks to be
pretty damn neat, for like $8 a month. Im paying $25 for 20 basic
cable channels, so Ive got the "fuck you" deal as far as TV. Ive got
to check into that Netflix thing. I know theres some other things like
HULU and such, but I really dont know anything at all about those.
Ive even got an old 8mm movie projector. In fact, I think I even have
the camera as well, around here somewhere. Talk about vintage!
I do still have a good Panasonic full size VHS video camera. Takes
nice movies. And I can just pop the tape into the VCR when Im done.
Im sure youre right about the evolution of the media. I figured by now
they would start putting movies on SD cards so it would all be solid
state with no moving parts, but Im thinking thats probably not gonna
happen. We used to have several video stores here in town, but now we
have none. Thing of the past, like me, lol
NB

[Mighty Wannabe]

On Jul 4, 3:07 pm, Winston_Smith <inva...@butterfly.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Jul 2012 11:42:14 -0700 (PDT), bates2012
>

Optical disk are different in storage capacity. CD, DVD, Blu-ray are
respectively 0.7 GB, 5 GB, 25 GB in storage capacity. One Blu-ray disk
can store 5 times the content of a DVD, so it has enough room to store
a high-definition movie. You are charged for the content. Movies look
a lot nicer in HD.

Over-the-web-delivery is just another anti-privacy scheme. There are
software to defeat the copy-protection scheme of DVD and Blu-ray
movies. I am sure people will figure out how to defeat their new copy-
protection scheme.

[Mighty Wannabe]

SD cards are too expensive compared with DVD and Blu-ray for the same
storage capacity.

If you have a computer and internet access, you can free load latest
movies using a Bit-Torrent client program.

[bates2012]

More expensive, yes, but I was thinking of back in the day when the
video store had shelves of bulky VHS tapes, and even DVD's, compared
to the space they would save compared to memory cards. Or even in a
home collection, the space savings would be enormous. But it aint
gonna happen.
NB

[Mighty Wannabe]

If you a survivalist, high energy electromagnetic pulse (EMP) from
nuclear detonation can erase all your VHS and you will be holing up in
your doomsday bunker to wait out the nuclear winter with no movies to
watch. On the other hand, CD, DVD and Blu-ray are almost
indestructable, unless you throw them into fire.

[Stormin Mormon]

The EMP may fry the NPN and PNP junctions
in the players. You could be in the twilight zone.
Have a lot of DVD and Blu Ray, and no device
to play or view them. You've entered another
dimension. The TSHTF / EMP dimension.

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.

"Mighty Wannabe" <wannabe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:e1be55e0-6c03-4f93...@g5g2000yqg.googlegroups.com...

> More expensive, yes, but I was thinking of back in the day when the
> video store had shelves of bulky VHS tapes, and even DVD's, compared
> to the space they would save compared to memory cards. Or even in a
> home collection, the space savings would be enormous. But it aint
> gonna happen.

[Mighty Wannabe]

On Jul 4, 5:34 pm, "Stormin Mormon"

<cayoung61***spambl...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> The EMP may fry the NPN and PNP junctions
> in the players. You could be in the twilight zone.
> Have a lot of  DVD and Blu Ray, and no device
> to play or view them. You've entered another
> dimension. The TSHTF / EMP dimension.
>
> Christopher A. Young

EMP will fry the electronics only if it is turned on. It is very
unlikely you have all the things turned on at that exact moment.

[Stormin Mormon]

The amount of damage will depend on several things; the power of the EMP
device(s), the amount of
shielding between the electronics and the EMP source, and the delicacy of
the electronics.
Semiconductors and microcircuit chips are the most susceptible. EMP will
damage your electronics even if
it is turned off because the EMP induces an electrical current into any
conductor it hits and in a matter of
only a few microseconds it can burn out sensitive circuits.
http://set2survive.com/EMP_survivors_notebook_1.html

How credible is this? I have no way to know.

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.

"Mighty Wannabe" <wannabe...@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:b83d7048-09b9-499f...@l4g2000yqf.googlegroups.com...

[Stormin Mormon]

These folks also say probably fry electronics, even if turned off.

http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/archive/index.php/t-389228.html

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.

"Mighty Wannabe" <wannabe...@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:b83d7048-09b9-499f...@l4g2000yqf.googlegroups.com...

[bates2012]

Oh well, movies are not a big part of my life anyway. Like music. I
have a decent stereo. Might turn it on once every couple of years. Got
the equipment if I want to use it, but rarely do. Now the PC, thats a
different story :o)
NB

[Mighty Wannabe]

On Jul 4, 6:37 pm, "Stormin Mormon"

<cayoung61***spambl...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> These folks also say probably fry electronics, even if turned off.
>
>      http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/archive/index.php/t-389228.html
>
> Christopher A. Young

A changing electromagnetic field can induce a voltage in a conductor
coil. A very long phone line or power line is considered the
conductor of a very large coil, and will pick up very high "surge
voltage" from a lightning storm or a solar storm. They is why they
invent "surge protectors" so that such surge voltage from your power
line or phone line is absorbed by the surge protector instead of
frying your electronic equipment.

EMP from a nuclear detonation may be much higher than the
electromagnetic field from lightning or solar storm. The induced
voltage is proportional to the length of the conductor so each of the
individual P-N junctions inside your semi-conductor devices should not
induce high enough voltage to fry itself. Besides, almost all
semiconductor gadgets have some of shielding, either from the metal
chassis or some tin foil covering the printed-circuit board to prevent
radio interference.

The transient surge voltages frying your electronic gadgets mostly
come from the power supply system which has copper windings and
ferrous core. The induced EMF may overwhelm the surge protectors and
fry the whole thing if it is turned on. Therefore it is a good idea to
turn off your TV during thunderstorms. But modern TV are actually
always on standby mode, so it may be a good idea to unplug your TV
altogether to be safe.

[rbowman]

Mighty Wannabe wrote:

> EMP will fry the electronics only if it is turned on. It is very
> unlikely you have all the things turned on at that exact moment.

Since my DVD player is plugged in all the time and requires AC power to
maintain the clock settings, I'm thinking it probably is 'turned on' to some
extent. I'm big on redundancy, but I don't have two DVD players with one
stored in a Faraday cage.

[rbowman]

Mighty Wannabe wrote:

> Movies look
> a lot nicer in HD.

Well, sometimes... The warts, blemishes, nose hairs, and makeup deficiencies
that were gently fuzzed out on the big screen do not escape scrutiny in HD.
For example, these days EmmyLou Harris benefits greatly by not being highly
defined.

[Flint]

Nope. EMP has no effect on the magnetic domains of tape. The PN
junctions of the chips in your DVD player will give up the ghost,
however. Best to keep both stored in a Faraday cage.

and you will be holing up in
> your doomsday bunker to wait out the nuclear winter with no movies to
> watch. On the other hand, CD, DVD and Blu-ray are almost
> indestructable, unless you throw them into fire.
>
>
>

--
MFB

[Winston_Smith]

On Wed, 4 Jul 2012 13:27:11 -0700 (PDT), Mighty Wannabe
<wannabe...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Jul 4, 3:07 pm, Winston_Smith <inva...@butterfly.net> wrote:

>> I don't have blu-ray but a lot of people I know consider the run of
>> the mill up-converting DVD players to be almost as good.  The players,
>> and especially the disks are much cheaper.  I something wonder if
>> blu-ray wasn't just a scam to escalate the price for a movie.  Every
>> format since 78s has been cheaper to manufacture and deliver and sold
>> for a lot more.
>
>
>Optical disk are different in storage capacity. CD, DVD, Blu-ray are
>respectively 0.7 GB, 5 GB, 25 GB in storage capacity. One Blu-ray disk
>can store 5 times the content of a DVD,

Oh wow, no one knew that.

>so it has enough room to store
>a high-definition movie. You are charged for the content. Movies look
>a lot nicer in HD.

My point exactly. Most people don't see much difference between a DVD
in a player with the various processing enhancements and a blu-ray.
Maybe you can see it; maybe you just bought into the specs/

>
>Over-the-web-delivery is just another anti-privacy scheme. There are
>software to defeat the copy-protection scheme of DVD and Blu-ray
>movies. I am sure people will figure out how to defeat their new copy-
>protection scheme.

Piracy is one aspect. Every protection scheme designed has been
cracked. I've cracked a couple. The secret is they want to make the
players/receivers as simple and cheap as possible to build so they use
really simple technology and talk about how perfect it is.

I think the bigger payoff for studios is pay per view rather than
stopping piracy. Most people don't bother stealing it anymore but
many DO watch favorite titles repeatedly. They do get tired of a disk
and give it away or sell it. Whole sales chains are built on
reselling used disks. With pay per view, each purchase is a one time,
one place thing.

[Winston_Smith]

On Wed, 04 Jul 2012 18:04:57 -0600, rbowman <bow...@montana.com>
wrote:

Yeah, but she still sings good.

[Winston_Smith]

On Wed, 4 Jul 2012 13:37:30 -0700 (PDT), Mighty Wannabe
<wannabe...@gmail.com> wrote:

>SD cards are too expensive compared with DVD and Blu-ray for the same
>storage capacity.

Do the math. A hard drive is still the cheapest storage an a $/byte
basis of any format, any technology. It's still the best choice on
cubic inches/byte and pounds/byte. You can buy two for 100% back up
and still be approximately competitive.

[Winston_Smith]

On Wed, 4 Jul 2012 14:11:35 -0700 (PDT), Mighty Wannabe
<wannabe...@gmail.com> wrote:

>If you a survivalist, high energy electromagnetic pulse (EMP) from
>nuclear detonation can erase all your VHS

I suspect that is bullshit. Got any reference?

>and you will be holing up in
>your doomsday bunker to wait out the nuclear winter with no movies to
>watch. On the other hand, CD, DVD and Blu-ray are almost
>indestructable, unless you throw them into fire.

Commercial ones will last over time (forgetting about the EMP fantasy)
because the lands are metal evaporated on via a mask much as an IC is
patterned. The home recordable ones, on the other hand, are based on
changes in dyes. They have a lifetime just like the old Coke poster.

There are disks sold at a premium price for archives but even then,
serious archives duplicate them on a schedule. Just like they did
with computer tapes 30 or 40 years ago.

[Winston_Smith]

On Wed, 4 Jul 2012 15:04:12 -0700 (PDT), Mighty Wannabe wrote:
>On Jul 4, 5:34 pm, "Stormin Mormon" wrote:

>> The EMP may fry the NPN and PNP junctions

No such thing. All junctions are PN. Most useful devices use
multiple junctions in complex combinations.

NPN and PNP describe bipolar transistors. They are sparingly used in
modern ICs.

>> in the players. You could be in the twilight zone.
>> Have a lot of  DVD and Blu Ray, and no device
>> to play or view them. You've entered another
>> dimension. The TSHTF / EMP dimension.
>

>EMP will fry the electronics only if it is turned on. It is very
>unlikely you have all the things turned on at that exact moment.

[Stormin Mormon]

Well, you can demagnetize the iron based tape, if it's too close to a
transformer. Power bust of EMF won't do that? I really don't know.

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.

"Flint" <agen...@section31.org> wrote in message

news:jt2n6j$eps$2...@dont-email.me...

[Gunner Asch]

Ive got cameras..from cut sheet film, loaded two sheets at a time (front
and back in cut film packs ) to cameras that are all hard memory.
4x5, 2 1/4x 3 1/4, 16mm movie and still, 8mm movie and stills,
620,220,118,35mm,120, etc etc etc

I of course have a Betamax camera and its "portable" recorder, and a
betamax VCR, but the ones that get the most, are VHS (I have several
hundred VHS movies), followed by of course DVD, then followed by the
computer and downloads.

And Ive adapters where I can digitize any format to any format, from
film to Data Sticks.

The next format will be some sort of hard memory stick.

One can already buy a usb data stick and put one or more... often times
up to a dozen movies on a single usb "flash drive"

Gunner, something of a camera collector

--
"The danger to America is not Barack Obama but a citizenry
capable of entrusting a man like him with the Presidency.
It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of an
Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense
and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have
such a man for their? president.. Blaming the prince of the
fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of
fools that made him their prince".

[Gunner Asch]

But only if you have high speed. Try downloading a movie at 56k

Its doable. But takes 2.24 days

[Gunner Asch]

Actually..it already has. I used to buy a 2gig flash drive (usb
connector) for $25. Then it went to $18, then to $12, then to 8, then to
$5. I bought 4 of them the other day for $5. And they are readily
available up to 64gig.

The more they sell..the cheaper they get.
Given that the average movie takes up just about 1.5gig...storage media
per movie is now down to about $1.5 each. Given that VHS tapes still
cost a buck for a good one...shrug.....

Gunner

[Winston_Smith]

On Wed, 4 Jul 2012 21:04:05 -0400, "Stormin Mormon"
<cayoung61***spam...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>Well, you can demagnetize the iron based tape, if it's too close to a
>transformer. Power bust of EMF won't do that? I really don't know.

What you say is sort of true for audio tapes. Try it with video tape.
I can put my reel to reel bulk eraser all over the case. I can put it
against the tape in the window. No visible effect. It will clean a
reel to reel tape in seconds.

Video tape requires a very high field level to become magnetized and
it retains a high field after it is recorded.

The same is true of floppy disks and probably hard drives.

[rbowman]

Winston_Smith wrote:

> Yeah, but she still sings good.

This is true. I suffered a rude awakening when I watched a contemporary
Irish music DVD. She only introduced it and I was thinking "Who's this old
hag?" until the dime dropped. Baez still looks pretty good but time hasn't
been kind to EmmyLou. But then, I'm not the handsome young stud I was back
when she was singing with Gram Parsons either.

I did like it when Steve Earle started looking closer to home for a duet
partner, though. I really like Moorer but she was never quite in the right
place at the right time to make it big.

[terryc]

On 05/07/12 04:42, bates2012 wrote:
> On Jul 4, 8:32 am, G. Morgan<sealte...@osama-is-dead.net> wrote:
>> bates2012 wrote:
>>> Found a copy on VHS today at a thrift store for a dollar. Watched it
>>> tonight. Dated, but still quite relevant, in my opinion.
>>
>> Did you have to buy a VCR too? ;-)
>
> No, I have 2 good VCR's. And a DVD player. But I do need to get me a
> Blu-Ray player. Then Ill be good until the next big thing in players
> comes around.

Do not buy a blu-ray player. it is the only thing stopping them bringing
out the next big thing and selling you all those old movies all over again.

[terryc]

On 05/07/12 06:44, bates2012 wrote:

> More expensive, yes, but I was thinking of back in the day when the
> video store had shelves of bulky VHS tapes, and even DVD's, compared
> to the space they would save compared to memory cards. Or even in a
> home collection, the space savings would be enormous. But it aint
> gonna happen.

If you are renting stuff, they go with the cheapest media possible so
there is no/little motivation to steal it.

[terryc]

On 05/07/12 07:11, Mighty Wannabe wrote:

> If you a survivalist, high energy electromagnetic pulse (EMP) from
> nuclear detonation can erase all your VHS and you will be holing up in
> your doomsday bunker to wait out the nuclear winter with no movies to
> watch. On the other hand, CD, DVD and Blu-ray are almost
> indestructable, unless you throw them into fire.

BULLSHIT, pure and utter bullshit. All my VHS tapes are still playable,
but I've chcked out wheelbarrow loads of unplayable CD's and DVDs.

[terryc]

Nope, EMP induces voltage into "wires".the voltage it introduces just
needs to be enough to fry the junction before any circut protetion kicks
in.Circuit protection in electronic devices is usally about protecting
from 50/60Hz transients during switch and switch off. EMP is close to
very high frequency radio waves of immense power.

[terryc]

On 05/07/12 06:27, Mighty Wannabe wrote:
> Movies look
> a lot nicer in HD.

Only if the original movie was shot in HD.

[bates2012]

On Jul 4, 9:01 pm, Gunner Asch <gunnera...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Jul 2012 13:15:12 -0700 (PDT), bates2012
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

I picked up a camera as well when I bought that copy of Red Dawn from
the thrift store. An old Concord Eye-Q Duo 2000. Wanted one back in
the day when they first came out. I think they were around a hundred
bux back then.
So I run across this one at the junk store. Got a tag on it that says
"works-?" and $1.00 So I buy it, hell, cant go too wrong with it.
First thing I checked was the battery terminals, and sure enough, one
of em is green. I cleaned it up, put 2 AA batts in it, and it works
just fine. Its only a 2 MP, and has a tiny screen, but it could come
in handy if my Sony blows up. At least the thing uses standard SD
memory cards. I think that was one of my better spent dollars :o)
NB

[Mighty Wannabe]

The induced electromagnetic field (EMF) is proportional to the length
of a conductor. The induced EMF is approximately 50,000 volts per
meter from the EMP of a nuclear detonation at high altitude in the
atmosphere. The power line will definitely have enough induced EMF to
fry your DVD player if it is plugged into the power mains.

You may want to read this article on EMP:
http://www.futurescience.com/emp.html

and this article about getting prepared for an EMP attack or severe
solar storm:
http://www.futurescience.com/emp/emp-protection.html

[Mighty Wannabe]

I like porn in HD.

[Gunner Asch]

http://www.retrevo.com/s/Concord-Camera-Duo-2000-Digital-Cameras-review-manual/id/534dj089/t/1-2/

You did pretty damned good!

Last week I picked up a Mamiya Sekor 1000 DTL for $5, with the case and
two lenses. Chuckle. Meter even works as does all the shutter speeds,
though it was a bit slow at first. Stuck it with the MS 500 in the
display case. Probably never ever use it. I still have a couple Nikon
F1s and Canon A1s (not AE-1s) that I trot out now and then.
Crom but I love thrift stores!

Gunner

[Mighty Wannabe]

On Jul 4, 8:32 pm, Winston_Smith <inva...@butterfly.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Jul 2012 13:27:11 -0700 (PDT), Mighty Wannabe
>

> <wannabesomeo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Jul 4, 3:07 pm, Winston_Smith <inva...@butterfly.net> wrote:
> >> I don't have blu-ray but a lot of people I know consider the run of
> >> the mill up-converting DVD players to be almost as good.  The players,
> >> and especially the disks are much cheaper.  I something wonder if
> >> blu-ray wasn't just a scam to escalate the price for a movie.  Every
> >> format since 78s has been cheaper to manufacture and deliver and sold
> >> for a lot more.
>
> >Optical disk are different in storage capacity. CD, DVD, Blu-ray are
> >respectively 0.7 GB, 5 GB, 25 GB in storage capacity. One Blu-ray disk
> >can store 5 times the content of a DVD,
>
> Oh wow, no one knew that.
>
> >so it has enough room to store
> >a high-definition movie. You are charged for the content. Movies look
> >a lot nicer in HD.
>
> My point exactly.  Most people don't see much difference between a DVD
> in a player with the various processing enhancements and a blu-ray.
> Maybe you can see it; maybe you just bought into the specs/
>

The problem may be in your TV. You cannot see HD if you output the HD
into a cheap TV. You need HD TV to see HD. Both the player and the
monitor must be HD.

>
>
> >Over-the-web-delivery is just another anti-privacy scheme.  There are
> >software to defeat the copy-protection scheme of DVD and Blu-ray
> >movies.  I am sure people will figure out how to defeat their new copy-
> >protection scheme.
>
> Piracy is one aspect.  Every protection scheme designed has been
> cracked.  I've cracked a couple.  The secret is they want to make the
> players/receivers as simple and cheap as possible to build so they use
> really simple technology and talk about how perfect it is.
>
> I think the bigger payoff for studios is pay per view rather than
> stopping piracy.  Most people don't bother stealing it anymore but
> many DO watch favorite titles repeatedly.  They do get tired of a disk
> and give it away or sell it.  Whole sales chains are built on
> reselling used disks.  With pay per view, each purchase is a one time,
> one place thing.

A DVD movie is yours to keep forever. I am sure a lot of people prefer
owning a hard copy.

[Mighty Wannabe]

EMP means ElectroMagnetic Pulse. Electromagnetic wave has both the
property of electricity and magnetism.

In a transformer, the electric field from an electric current in the
primary windings creates a magnetic field in the ferrous core, and in
turn the magnetic field in the ferrous core creates the electric field
in the secondary windings.

The field strength of the EMP from a high altitude nuclear detonation
is about 50,000 volts per metre. That is about 50 volts/millimetre.
Each individual PN junction in an IC is in terms of microns so the
induced EMF across each PN junction is tolerable. The killer is the
long wires that will induce enough high voltage to fry the machine.

[Mighty Wannabe]

On Jul 4, 8:42 pm, Winston_Smith <inva...@butterfly.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Jul 2012 14:11:35 -0700 (PDT), Mighty Wannabe
>

> <wannabesomeo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >If you a survivalist, high energy electromagnetic pulse (EMP) from
> >nuclear detonation can erase all your VHS
>
> I suspect that is bullshit.  Got any reference?
>

I don't have any reference. That is basic common sense. Electric field
and Magnetic field are the duality of the property of electromagnetic
field.

Nobody mentioned it because "almost" nobody uses VHS anymore.

[Mighty Wannabe]

The voltage induced by EMP is about 50,000 volts/metre. The power line
will have extremely high over voltage. Even the wiring in your own
home alone will have high enough voltage to fry your DVD player.

If it is not turned on, then the physical contact of the switch will
separate the player from the power mains. It "may" safe the player
from death.

[Mighty Wannabe]

I think you don't mean 56 kilo-bit/s dial-up internet speed. You will
only get about 6 kilo-Byte/second.

I used to have 25Mb/s fibre optics but they charged me an arm and a
leg for over-the-limit usage so I switched to another company and
downgraded my internet connection to 5Mb/s with unlimited usage.

I can get close to 600 kilo-Byte/s in my Torrent download with my 5
mega-bit/s connection.

[Mighty Wannabe]

On Jul 4, 10:21 pm, Winston_Smith <inva...@butterfly.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Jul 2012 21:04:05 -0400, "Stormin Mormon"
>

> <cayoung61***spambl...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >Well, you can demagnetize the iron based tape, if it's too close to a
> >transformer. Power bust of EMF won't do that? I really don't know.
>
> What you say is sort of true for audio tapes.  Try it with video tape.
> I can put my reel to reel bulk eraser all over the case.  I can put it
> against the tape in the window.  No visible effect.  It will clean a
> reel to reel tape in seconds.
>
> Video tape requires a very high field level to become magnetized and
> it retains a high field after it is recorded.
>
> The same is true of floppy disks and probably hard drives.

You have missed out on the VHS tape eraser during its hay days:

Vintage Realistic High Power Bulk VHS Video/Audio Tape Eraser

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Vtg-Realistic-High-Power-Bulk-VHS-Video-Audio-Tape-Eraser-Brand-New-NIB-/280912644541?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item4167b2c9bd#ht_552wt_1133

Just search for "Video tape eraser" in eBay to get more selection.

[Mighty Wannabe]

Surge protectors are protecting the circuit from induced voltage in
the power line due to lightning storm or solar storm, not from
switching on or off.

Surge protector are not mechanical relays that takes time to activate.
The surge protectors in most power bars for home use are a disk shaped
device like a high-voltage capacitor which has an electrical
insulation designed to break through at the threshold voltage to
dissipate the transient surge energy. There is no time delay in that.

[Mighty Wannabe]

Movie shot in film have higher definition than HD. Some of the DVD
movies are remastered from mother film into HD.

[rbowman]

Mighty Wannabe wrote:

> Each individual PN junction in an IC is in terms of microns so the
> induced EMF across each PN junction is tolerable. The killer is the
> long wires that will induce enough high voltage to fry the machine.

Deep fried machines have a tendency to have fried PN junctions, capacitors,
and circuit traces. It's sort of splitting hairs to worry about exactly
where the induced EMF came from.

[terryc]

On 05/07/12 22:56, Mighty Wannabe wrote:

> Surge protectors are protecting the circuit from induced voltage in
> the power line due to lightning storm or solar storm, not from
> switching on or off.

Sigh, grandma suck eggs sunshine.

[terryc]

On 05/07/12 22:16, Mighty Wannabe wrote:

> Nobody mentioned it because "almost" nobody uses VHS anymore.

Not selling new stuff doesn't mean that nobody uses it.
Next you will be saying that no one uses tape any more.

[bates2012]

On Jul 5, 6:46 am, Gunner Asch <gunnera...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Jul 2012 00:05:57 -0700 (PDT), bates2012
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

> http://www.retrevo.com/s/Concord-Camera-Duo-2000-Digital-Cameras-revi...

>
> You did pretty damned good!
>
> Last week I picked up a Mamiya Sekor 1000 DTL for $5, with the case and
> two lenses. Chuckle. Meter even works as does all the shutter speeds,
> though it was a bit slow at first.  Stuck it with the MS 500 in the
> display case. Probably never ever use it. I still have a couple Nikon
> F1s and Canon A1s (not AE-1s) that I trot out now and then.
> Crom but I love thrift stores!
>
> Gunner
>
> --
> "The danger to America is not Barack Obama but a citizenry
>  capable of entrusting a man like him with the Presidency.
>  It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of an
> Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense
> and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have
> such a man for their? president.. Blaming the prince of the
> fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of
> fools that made him their prince".

I always wanted one of those Sony Mavicas that use a floppy disc to
record on. Seemed like a great idea at the time, and I guess it was.
Then I think Sony went to a mini disc, still a good idea. Old tech, I
know, but I like foolin with stuff.
The thrift store had several 35mm cameras, but they were all no name
brands. They also had a few Kodaks, some Id never heard of. I think
one was called a "Starlight" or something like that. Had the box and
all. I think it was $5. Then I think there was a Kodak Hawkeye or some
such.
Yeah, youre like me, you like foolin with stuff, old or not :o)
NB

[Gunner Asch]

You can still buy Mavicas on Ebay for very little money. And they really
are a decent camera, even today. The problem is..the floppy disk. Far
too many computers today dont have a floppy drive. Many of the later
Mavica models also had a solid state "flash card" drive, such as Smart
Card. One of my buddies, a machine tool dealer, has used Mavicas for
years taking photos of his wares, works very well indeed. Save time can
be a bit slow however. Shrug

Im holding off on snagging one until I find a MVC-CD500

Its the one that uses a CD as storage media..burns it right in the
camera <G>

http://www.steves-digicams.com/camera-reviews/sony/mavica-cd500/sony-mavica-cd500-review.html


Some..some of the Kodaks are worth a few dollars.

Google "kodak camera collectors"

[Mighty Wannabe]

Long wires do make a difference when you consider the EMP strength is
expressed in 50,000 v/m.


The following is an excerpt about popular EMP myths:
http://www.futurescience.com/emp/EMP-myths.html
//
EMP Myths

Cars dying: Some say that all vehicles traveling will come to a
halt, with all modern vehicles damaged because of their use of modern
electronics (and one movie even had a bulk, non-electronic part
dying). Most likely there will be some vehicles affected, but
probably just a small fraction of them (although this could create
traffic jams in large cities). A car does not have very long cabling
to act as antennas, and there is some protection from metallic
construction. As non-metallic materials are used more and more in the
future to decrease weight and increase fuel efficiency, this advantage
may disappear.

Wristwatch dying: One movie critic pointed out that electronics in a
helicopter were affected, but not the star's electronic watch. A
watch is much too small for HEMP to affect it.

Turn equipment off: There is truth to this recommendation (if there
were a way to know that a burst was about to happen). Equipment is
more vulnerable if it is operating, because some failure modes
involving E1 HEMP trigger the system's energy to damage itself.
However, damage can also happen, but not as easily, to systems that
are turned off.

Maximum conductor length: There is a suggestion that equipment will
be OK if all connected conductors are less than a specific length.
Certainly shorter lengths are generally better, but there is no magic
length value, with shorter always being better and longer not.
Coupling is much too complex for such a blanket statement -- instead
it should be "the shorter the better, in general". (There can be
exceptions, such as resonance effects, which depend on line lengths.)

Myth: Small transistorized radio receivers would survive a nuclear
EMP attack. Fact: In many areas affected by an EMP attack, many
small solid-state radio receivers probably would survive if their
antennas were not extended and they were not connected to any external
wires. Many other unprotected radio receivers probably would not
survive, though. Where most people go wrong is the source of the
information for their belief that radio receivers would survive. One
source for the belief is the testing of small transistorized radios
that was done during the 1970s. That testing cannot be extrapolated
to today's solid-state receivers, which usually use integrated
circuits that are much more sensitive to EMP than the receivers of the
1970s that used much more rugged discrete transistors.
//


I want to argue against the ruggedness of discrete transistors used in
the 1970s. They are actually more vulnerable because they have three
metal leads coming out of the PN junctions to be soldered onto the
printed-circuited board and the induced voltage from the EMP across
those metal leads are much greater than the individual transistors
embedded inside an IC because of the physical distance between those
junction electrodes.

[bates2012]

On Jul 5, 6:46 am, Gunner Asch <gunnera...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Jul 2012 00:05:57 -0700 (PDT), bates2012
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

> http://www.retrevo.com/s/Concord-Camera-Duo-2000-Digital-Cameras-revi...

>
> You did pretty damned good!
>
> Last week I picked up a Mamiya Sekor 1000 DTL for $5, with the case and
> two lenses. Chuckle. Meter even works as does all the shutter speeds,
> though it was a bit slow at first.  Stuck it with the MS 500 in the
> display case. Probably never ever use it. I still have a couple Nikon
> F1s and Canon A1s (not AE-1s) that I trot out now and then.
> Crom but I love thrift stores!
>
> Gunner
>
> --
> "The danger to America is not Barack Obama but a citizenry
>  capable of entrusting a man like him with the Presidency.
>  It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of an
> Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense
> and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have
> such a man for their? president.. Blaming the prince of the
> fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of
> fools that made him their prince".

And yard sales. A few years ago, I bought a big box full of stuff, and
there was a good Bolex in there. It did real well on ebay ;o)
NB

[bates2012]

Myself, well, its a buck plus now to rent at Redbox, so if I find a
movie for 50 cents to a buck at a yard sale, etc., I not only get to
watch it, I dont have to return the damn thing, lol
NB

[rbowman]

Mighty Wannabe wrote:

> EMP Myths

I figure almost everthing about EMP is a myth. That's not to say there
wouldn't be deleterious effects, perhaps massive in scope, but like Pelosi's
favorite law, we won't really know until after it happens what will or won't
be affected.

[rbowman]

bates2012 wrote:

> Myself, well, its a buck plus now to rent at Redbox, so if I find a
> movie for 50 cents to a buck at a yard sale, etc., I not only get to
> watch it, I dont have to return the damn thing, lol

For gems like 'Tammy Tell Me True' you'd wish you could return it.

[Winston_Smith]

On Wed, 4 Jul 2012 16:26:44 -0700 (PDT), Mighty Wannabe wrote:
>On Jul 4, 6:37 pm, "Stormin Mormon" wrote:

>> These folks also say probably fry electronics, even if turned off.
>>      http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/archive/index.php/t-389228.html
>> Christopher A. Young
>
>A changing electromagnetic field can induce a voltage in a conductor
>coil. A very long phone line or power line is considered the
>conductor of a very large coil, and will pick up very high "surge
>voltage" from a lightning storm or a solar storm. They is why they
>invent "surge protectors" so that such surge voltage from your power
>line or phone line is absorbed by the surge protector instead of
>frying your electronic equipment.

I just love the way you shoot off a broad generalization and then
redefine it to a specific case when you get caught.

You said " probably fry electronics, even if turned off.". NOW you
say you are only talking about things connected to the phone line
and/or the power line.

[Mighty Wannabe]

There are enough data from Cold War days to predict the effect if one
is detonated over a highly populated and developed country.

This is a very interesting read:
Report of the Commission to Assess the
Threat to the United States from
Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack
Critical National Infrastructures
April 2008

http://www.futurescience.com/A2473-EMP-Commission.pdf

[Winston_Smith]

On Thu, 5 Jul 2012 05:23:23 -0700 (PDT), Mighty Wannabe
<wannabe...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Jul 4, 8:45 pm, Winston_Smith <inva...@butterfly.net> wrote:
>> On Wed, 4 Jul 2012 15:04:12 -0700 (PDT), Mighty Wannabe wrote:
>>
>> >EMP will fry the electronics only if it is turned on. It is very
>> >unlikely you have all the things turned on at that exact moment.
>>
>> I suspect that is bullshit.  Got any reference?
>
>The voltage induced by EMP is about 50,000 volts/metre. The power line
>will have extremely high over voltage. Even the wiring in your own
>home alone will have high enough voltage to fry your DVD player.

I asked for a reference. That means to an accepted authority. Instead
I get more of your rambling babble.

You said "EMP will fry the electronics only if it is turned on." Now
tell me about all the battery powered stuff. Is it in psychic
communication with its line powered colleges? Does it fry to show
solidarity with it's dead friends?

>If it is not turned on, then the physical contact of the switch will
>separate the player from the power mains. It "may" safe the player
>from death.

Bullshit.

1. Most equipment has no physical off switch. What you get is a push
button that tells an always-on circuit to turn the device on. The
device is always powered and hooked to the power line.

2. If you DO have a physical switch, it will arc at a some hundred
volts and you tell us there is 50,000 Volts.

[terryc]

On 06/07/12 04:23, Mighty Wannabe wrote:
> On Jul 5, 10:09 am, rbowman<bow...@montana.com> wrote:
>> Mighty Wannabe wrote:
>>> Each individual PN junction in an IC is in terms of microns so the
>>> induced EMF across each PN junction is tolerable. The killer is the
>>> long wires that will induce enough high voltage to fry the machine.
>>
>> Deep fried machines have a tendency to have fried PN junctions, capacitors,
>> and circuit traces. It's sort of splitting hairs to worry about exactly
>> where the induced EMF came from.
>
>
> Long wires do make a difference when you consider the EMP strength is
> expressed in 50,000 v/m.
>
>
> The following is an excerpt about popular EMP myths:

Lol, chanelling the moron C&P.

[terryc]

On 06/07/12 12:12, Mighty Wannabe wrote:
> On Jul 5, 9:57 pm, rbowman<bow...@montana.com> wrote:
>> Mighty Wannabe wrote:
>>> EMP Myths
>>
>> I figure almost everthing about EMP is a myth. That's not to say there
>> wouldn't be deleterious effects, perhaps massive in scope, but like Pelosi's
>> favorite law, we won't really know until after it happens what will or won't
>> be affected.
>
> There are enough data from Cold War days to predict the effect if one
> is detonated over a highly populated and developed country.

That is not the one I'm worried aboiut. I'm worried about the one
detonated down the street corner. Hint Scientific America has the plans.
>

[Winston_Smith]

Oh give us a break High, Mighty know it all master of bullshit.

I didn't miss out and I know where to get them.

I pointed out the error in what SM wrote, namely being in the general
vicinity of a transformer would erase VHS tapes. It will not. It
takes specialized equipment to do it.

[Winston_Smith]

On Thu, 5 Jul 2012 05:16:38 -0700 (PDT), Mighty Wannabe wrote:
>On Jul 4, 8:42 pm, Winston_Smith wrote:

>> On Wed, 4 Jul 2012 14:11:35 -0700 (PDT), Mighty Wannabe wrote:

>> >If you a survivalist, high energy electromagnetic pulse (EMP) from
>> >nuclear detonation can erase all your VHS
>>
>> I suspect that is bullshit.  Got any reference?
>>
>I don't have any reference. That is basic common sense.

Something we have come to mistrust from your many erroneous posts.

>Electric field and Magnetic field are the duality of the property
>of electromagnetic field. Nobody mentioned it because "almost"
>nobody uses VHS anymore.

Your usual bullshit. YOU YOU YOU mentioned it. You quote yourself
saying it IN THIS POST. (see above). And YOU YOU YOU mentioned it in
earlier posts.

[Winston_Smith]

On Thu, 5 Jul 2012 05:05:53 -0700 (PDT), Mighty Wannabe wrote:
>On Jul 4, 8:32 pm, Winston_Smith wrote:

>> On Wed, 4 Jul 2012 13:27:11 -0700 (PDT), Mighty Wannabe wrote:

>> >so it has enough room to store
>> >a high-definition movie. You are charged for the content. Movies look
>> >a lot nicer in HD.
>>
>> My point exactly.  Most people don't see much difference between a DVD
>> in a player with the various processing enhancements and a blu-ray.
>> Maybe you can see it; maybe you just bought into the specs/
>
>The problem may be in your TV. You cannot see HD if you output the HD
>into a cheap TV. You need HD TV to see HD. Both the player and the
>monitor must be HD.

There you go with your usual irrelevant assumptions. My TV is NSTC
CRT and I haven't had it on since 2008. Watched the election returns
didn't like the outcome much.

Your reading comprehension also sucks. I wrote "Most people don't
see". I know a dozen people of this opinion and it's been the subject
of endless articles on the net.

I love the way you just make up whatever BS you need to make your
earlier BS work. For the moment.

[Winston_Smith]

Your usual bullshit. The version of digital recording studios use is
vastly better than anything in the consumer market and vastly better
than the best film. As far back as the original Star Wars, Lucas shot
it in digital for that very reason.

[Mighty Wannabe]

On Jul 5, 10:38 pm, Winston_Smith <inva...@butterfly.net> wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Jul 2012 05:05:53 -0700 (PDT), Mighty Wannabe wrote:
> >On Jul 4, 8:32 pm, Winston_Smith wrote:
> >> On Wed, 4 Jul 2012 13:27:11 -0700 (PDT), Mighty Wannabe wrote:
> >> >so it has enough room to store
> >> >a high-definition movie. You are charged for the content. Movies look
> >> >a lot nicer in HD.
>
> >> My point exactly.  Most people don't see much difference between a DVD
> >> in a player with the various processing enhancements and a blu-ray.
> >> Maybe you can see it; maybe you just bought into the specs/
>
> >The problem may be in your TV. You cannot see HD if you output the HD
> >into a cheap TV. You need HD TV to see HD. Both the player and the
> >monitor must be HD.
>
> There you go with your usual irrelevant assumptions.  My TV is NSTC
> CRT and I haven't had it on since 2008.  Watched the election returns
> didn't like the outcome much.
>

Your problem right there. Nobody uses CRT to watch HD. Get yourself a
flat panel LCD HD TV with LED backlighting.

[Winston_Smith]

Do you actually read anything or just flap your gums.

I don't watch TV. Which thumb did you suck out the idea I'm watching
HD on a CRT? I said the set hasn't been on for four years. Then only
for one night. And not for several years before that. Is Charlie's
Angels still on?

[Winston_Smith]

On Thu, 05 Jul 2012 20:34:25 -0700, Winston_Smith
<inv...@butterfly.net> wrote:

>On Thu, 5 Jul 2012 20:26:30 -0700 (PDT), Mighty Wannabe
><wannabe...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Jul 5, 10:38�pm, Winston_Smith <inva...@butterfly.net> wrote:
>>> On Thu, 5 Jul 2012 05:05:53 -0700 (PDT), Mighty Wannabe wrote:
>>> >On Jul 4, 8:32�pm, Winston_Smith wrote:
>>> >> On Wed, 4 Jul 2012 13:27:11 -0700 (PDT), Mighty Wannabe wrote:
>
>>> >> >so it has enough room to store
>>> >> >a high-definition movie. You are charged for the content. Movies look
>>> >> >a lot nicer in HD.
>>>
>>> >> My point exactly. �Most people don't see much difference between a DVD
>>> >> in a player with the various processing enhancements and a blu-ray.
>>> >> Maybe you can see it; maybe you just bought into the specs/
>>>
>>> >The problem may be in your TV. You cannot see HD if you output the HD
>>> >into a cheap TV. You need HD TV to see HD. Both the player and the
>>> >monitor must be HD.
>>>
>>> There you go with your usual irrelevant assumptions. �My TV is NSTC
>>> CRT and I haven't had it on since 2008. �Watched the election returns
>>> didn't like the outcome much.

snip restored. You cut it to ignore that your claims are mostly not
supported and try to make it some short coming on my part.

>|| Your reading comprehension also sucks. I wrote "Most people don't
>|| see". I know a dozen people of this opinion and it's been the subject
>|| of endless articles on the net.

[Mighty Wannabe]

On Jul 5, 10:40 pm, Winston_Smith <inva...@butterfly.net> wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Jul 2012 06:01:43 -0700 (PDT), Mighty Wannabe
>

Nobody has made digital camera with higher definition than real film
yet.

[bates2012]

On Jul 5, 9:40 pm, Winston_Smith <inva...@butterfly.net> wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Jul 2012 06:01:43 -0700 (PDT), Mighty Wannabe
>

Mike Rowe on Dirty Jobs was talking about the HD cameras that they use
on the show, they cost like 50 grand and up. So they gotta be way
superior to anything at the consumer level, one would think.
NB

[bates2012]

On Jul 5, 9:24 pm, Winston_Smith <inva...@butterfly.net> wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Jul 2012 05:43:20 -0700 (PDT), Mighty Wannabe
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> <wannabesomeo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Jul 4, 10:21 pm, Winston_Smith <inva...@butterfly.net> wrote:
> >> On Wed, 4 Jul 2012 21:04:05 -0400, "Stormin Mormon"
>
> >> <cayoung61***spambl...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> >Well, you can demagnetize the iron based tape, if it's too close to a
> >> >transformer. Power bust of EMF won't do that? I really don't know.
>
> >> What you say is sort of true for audio tapes.  Try it with video tape.
> >> I can put my reel to reel bulk eraser all over the case.  I can put it
> >> against the tape in the window.  No visible effect.  It will clean a
> >> reel to reel tape in seconds.
>
> >> Video tape requires a very high field level to become magnetized and
> >> it retains a high field after it is recorded.
>
> >> The same is true of floppy disks and probably hard drives.
>
> >You have missed out on the VHS tape eraser during its hay days:
> >Vintage Realistic High Power Bulk VHS Video/Audio Tape Eraser

> >http://www.ebay.com/itm/Vtg-Realistic-High-Power-Bulk-VHS-Video-Audio...

> >Just search for "Video tape eraser" in eBay to get more selection.
>
> Oh give us a break High, Mighty know it all master of bullshit.
>
> I didn't miss out and I know where to get them.
>
> I pointed out the error in what SM wrote, namely being in the general
> vicinity of a transformer would erase VHS tapes.  It will not.  It
> takes specialized equipment to do it.

LOL, if an EMP fries all my tapes and VCR's, I think that will be the
least of my worries :o)
NB

[bates2012]

Saw an article the other day, I think it was some tech college lab
made one with like 50 MP.
Ive seen 15 MP for sale reasonable, and I think I saw some that were
like 18 MP.
My Sony camcorder like thing is only 5, but it gets me by. I would
like a better cam tho, say a 12MP. They have come down in price a lot
already.
Even so, Im old, and I still like film too!
NB

[bates2012]

On Jul 5, 9:20 pm, Winston_Smith <inva...@butterfly.net> wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Jul 2012 05:23:23 -0700 (PDT), Mighty Wannabe
>

True, most all my shit is on standby, even when turned off. Gotta
either have a good surge suppressor or unplug the shit when storms get
rough.
And surge suppressors work, because last year after a bad
thunderstorm, the TV wouldnt come on. I plugged it straight in the
wall and it worked fine. So it fried the surge suppressor. It did its
job. So the shit definitely works, at least that time.
NB

[Winston_Smith]

Got a cite for this bit of creative bullshit ?

35mm movie film places the frame across the film i.e., it's half the
size of what a 35mm still camera produces. The width of the image on
the movie film is 24mm.

Really good film and a really good lens - and at critical aperture -
might produce 80 lines/mm in the center. Only in the center. An
optical "line" is a black bar and a white bar so it corresponds to two
pixels.

80 x 24 x 2 ~ 3840 pixels wide. Taking the traditional 3:4 ratio,
that would be 2880 pixels high. 3840 x 2880 = 11 mega pixels.

That is the flat out best film can do under ideal conditions. And you
don't get ideal in practial movie shooting. There are lots of home
cameras with higher resolution than that without even considering
professional stuff.

Sure there are other formats and other film sizes, but the numbers
aren't different by orders of magnitude.

Then there is the problem of moving the film, stopping it, and
clamping it in place in time for the next frame. It might be moving,
it might not be flat. There goes a lot of resolution right there. And
what good is resolution if the subject is moving. A CCD can have
shutter speeds of a millisecond. A physical shutter that fast is
silly in movie work and would require either very fast film (low
resolution) or ridiculous amounts of light.

[Gunner Asch]

However..their carrying capacity was much much bigger than SMDS
components

Much bigger

[Gunner Asch]

<VBG>

NICE!!!

[Larry]

In article <367913d8-f89b-46bf-8f7b-0a3060aa7488
@w6g2000yqg.googlegroups.com>, bate...@hushmail.com says...

>
> On Jul 4, 8:32 am, G. Morgan <sealte...@osama-is-dead.net> wrote:
> > bates2012 wrote:
> > >Found a copy on VHS today at a thrift store for a dollar. Watched it
> > >tonight. Dated, but still quite relevant, in my opinion.
> >
> > Did you have to buy a VCR too?  ;-)
>
> No, I have 2 good VCR's. And a DVD player. But I do need to get me a
> Blu-Ray player. Then Ill be good until the next big thing in players
> comes around.

> NB

A few years back I picked up a video disc player with a library of about 100
movies for $50. Remember the old 12" video discs? I kept it for about 4 years
and watched the movies, then sold it for what I paid for it.

I also had an 8-track recorder after they quit making 8-tracks, with a pickup
load of fantastic albums that eventually wore out. The best of the bunch was
Chuck Mangione Live, which had a phenomenal version of "The Land Of Make-
Believe" on it. I would love to find that cut again, but it apparently never
made it to digital media. There was also a Fleetwood Mac Live album that was
great. It's not the medium, it's the message.

[Larry]

In article <653a1347-7b5a-4c62-94bc-be30583043f3
@b13g2000yql.googlegroups.com>, wannabe...@gmail.com says...

> If you have a computer and internet access, you can free load latest
> movies using a Bit-Torrent client program.

Bit-Torrent is the least secure digital connection you can use. It lays your
computer wide open to invasion.

[Larry]

In article <ad28e3fc-bb3d-44fe-b86b-
36be85...@v15g2000yqi.googlegroups.com>, wannabe...@gmail.com says...
> The induced electromagnetic field (EMF) is proportional to the length
> of a conductor. The induced EMF is approximately 50,000 volts per
> meter from the EMP of a nuclear detonation at high altitude in the
> atmosphere. The power line will definitely have enough induced EMF to
> fry your DVD player if it is plugged into the power mains.

That means the power cord of any device is long enough to fry it.

[terryc]

It does? Please explain?
As far as I knew it jst transfers bits of files from many servers and
put the various bits back to gether to make the whole. It is actually
just a protocol (, plus a specific application implimenting the protocol
and anow a website.)

[terryc]

On 06/07/12 13:26, Mighty Wannabe wrote:

> Your problem right there. Nobody uses CRT to watch HD.

Hands Up and it s a fscking heavy monster tat is going to cost a few
slabs to get turfed onto the kerb when it need disposing.

[terryc]

On 06/07/12 13:34, Winston_Smith wrote:
> Is Charlie's
> Angels still on?

Probably. Our TV chanels are full of re-runs from the 60's, 70, 80, s
and every other period.

[Gunner Asch]

On Thu, 5 Jul 2012 22:37:46 -0700, Larry <lar...@peaksky.com> wrote:

>Chuck Mangione Live

<https://www.google.com/search?q=Chuck+Mangione+Live&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:unofficial&client=firefox-aurora#hl=en&client=firefox-aurora&hs=XjO&rls=org.mozilla:en-US%3Aunofficial&sclient=psy-ab&q=chuck+mangione+live+land+of+make+believe+album&oq=Chuck+Mangione+Live+land+of+&gs_l=serp.1.1.33i29l4.36971.38472.0.42496.9.9.0.0.0.1.1571.5983.3-1j0j1j1j2j1.6.0...0.0.P2DR4G-13Vg&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_cp.r_qf.,cf.osb&fp=15f4f2ff325d4b5a&biw=1280&bih=617>
\

[Mighty Wannabe]

On Jul 6, 12:02 am, Winston_Smith <inva...@butterfly.net> wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Jul 2012 20:28:54 -0700 (PDT), Mighty Wannabe
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

> <wannabesomeo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Jul 5, 10:40 pm, Winston_Smith <inva...@butterfly.net> wrote:
> >> On Thu, 5 Jul 2012 06:01:43 -0700 (PDT), Mighty Wannabe
>
> >> <wannabesomeo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >On Jul 5, 12:35 am, terryc <newsninespam-s...@woa.com.au> wrote:
> >> >> On 05/07/12 06:27, Mighty Wannabe wrote:
>
> >> >> >  Movies look a lot nicer in HD.
>
> >> >> Only if the original movie was shot in HD.
>
> >> >Movie shot in film have higher definition than HD. Some of the DVD
> >> >movies are remastered from mother film into HD.
>
> >> Your usual bullshit.  The version of digital recording studios use is
> >> vastly better than anything in the consumer market and vastly better
> >> than the best film.  As far back as the original Star Wars, Lucas shot
> >> it in digital for that very reason.
>
> >Nobody has made digital camera with higher definition than real film
> >yet.
>
> Got a cite for this bit of creative bullshit ?
>

Can you find a 2-giga pixel digital camera to match the resolution of
a film camera?
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/film-resolution.htm
//
But wait: each film pixel represents true R, G and B data, not the
softer Bayer interpolated data from digital camera sensors. A single-
chip 87 MP digital camera still couldn't see details as fine as a
piece of 35mm film.

Since the lie factor factor from digital cameras is about two, you'd
need a digital camera of about 87 x 2 = 175 MP to see every last
detail that makes onto film.

That's just 35mm film. Pros don't shoot 35mm, they usually shoot
2-1/4" or 4x5."

At the same rates, 2-1/4" (56mm square) would be 313 MP, and
4x5" (95x120mm) would be 95 x 120 = 11,400 square millimeters = 1,140
MP, with no Bayer Interpolation. A digital camera with Bayer
Interpolation would need to be rated at better than 2 gigapixels to
see things that can be seen on a sheet of 4x5" film.
//

[Mighty Wannabe]

On Jul 6, 12:02 am, Winston_Smith <inva...@butterfly.net> wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Jul 2012 20:28:54 -0700 (PDT), Mighty Wannabe
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

> <wannabesomeo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Jul 5, 10:40 pm, Winston_Smith <inva...@butterfly.net> wrote:
> >> On Thu, 5 Jul 2012 06:01:43 -0700 (PDT), Mighty Wannabe
>
> >> <wannabesomeo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >On Jul 5, 12:35 am, terryc <newsninespam-s...@woa.com.au> wrote:
> >> >> On 05/07/12 06:27, Mighty Wannabe wrote:
>
> >> >> >  Movies look a lot nicer in HD.
>
> >> >> Only if the original movie was shot in HD.
>
> >> >Movie shot in film have higher definition than HD. Some of the DVD
> >> >movies are remastered from mother film into HD.
>
> >> Your usual bullshit.  The version of digital recording studios use is
> >> vastly better than anything in the consumer market and vastly better
> >> than the best film.  As far back as the original Star Wars, Lucas shot
> >> it in digital for that very reason.
>
> >Nobody has made digital camera with higher definition than real film
> >yet.
>
> Got a cite for this bit of creative bullshit ?
>

Can you find a 2 giga-pixel digital camera to match the resolution of

[Gunner Asch]

Absolutely correct

Gunner

[Winston_Smith]

On Fri, 6 Jul 2012 01:17:18 -0700 (PDT), Mighty Wannabe wrote:
>On Jul 6, 12:02 am, Winston_Smith wrote:
>> On Thu, 5 Jul 2012 20:28:54 -0700 (PDT), Mighty Wannabe wrote:
>> >On Jul 5, 10:40 pm, Winston_Smith wrote:

>> >> On Thu, 5 Jul 2012 06:01:43 -0700 (PDT), Mighty Wannabe wrote:
>> >> >> On 05/07/12 06:27, Mighty Wannabe wrote:
>>
>> >> >> >  Movies look a lot nicer in HD.

>> >> >Movie shot in film have higher definition than HD. Some of the DVD
>> >> >movies are remastered from mother film into HD.
>>
>> >> Your usual bullshit.  The version of digital recording studios use is
>> >> vastly better than anything in the consumer market and vastly better
>> >> than the best film.  As far back as the original Star Wars, Lucas shot
>> >> it in digital for that very reason.
>>
>> >Nobody has made digital camera with higher definition than real film
>> >yet.
>>
>> Got a cite for this bit of creative bullshit ?
>
>Can you find a 2 giga-pixel digital camera to match the resolution of
>a film camera?
>
> http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/film-resolution.htm
> //
>But wait: each film pixel represents true R, G and B data, not the
>softer Bayer interpolated data from digital camera sensors. A single-
>chip 87 MP digital camera still couldn't see details as fine as a
>piece of 35mm film.

Color isn't handled that way in digital. If it was, it isn't handled
that way on DVDs and if it was, it isn't handled that way in HDTV.
Your statement related to blu-ray movies viewed on a HDTV receiver.

>|| Movies look a lot nicer in HD.

And once you get by all that bullshit of yours, the eye can't see
color in small detail area even if it were in the display.

>Since the lie factor factor from digital cameras is about two, you'd
>need a digital camera of about 87 x 2 = 175 MP to see every last
>detail that makes onto film.

I already covered your super secret lie factor. In the optical world,
a line of resolution is comprised of a black line and a white line.
That's two pixels in the digital world. I love the way everything you
want to push off the table, is a "lie" or incompetent engineers that
aren't as smart as you.

>That's just 35mm film. Pros don't shoot 35mm, they usually shoot
>2-1/4" or 4x5."

We are talking about movies. Just for starters, your 35mm
still-camera uses 2.23 times the film area a 35 mm movie does.

>At the same rates, 2-1/4" (56mm square) would be 313 MP, and
>4x5" (95x120mm) would be 95 x 120 = 11,400 square millimeters = 1,140
>MP, with no Bayer Interpolation. A digital camera with Bayer
>Interpolation would need to be rated at better than 2 gigapixels to
>see things that can be seen on a sheet of 4x5" film.

I love the way you change the rules every time you get painted in a
corner and have your ass handed to you on a silver platter.

Or are you now telling us they shoot MOVIES on 4x5" film ?

Conventional movie film has (had because they don't shoot on film
anymore) a frame are of 0.67 sq inches. You want to compare that to
20 sq inches of film. That's 30 times the area.

The resolution of film is constant per unit area. If you allow a
bigger film area to get more total lines, I get a bigger CCD to allow
more pixels.

Now tell us about your precious film resolution on a unit area basis.

If you don't have anything but apples vs. oranges, give up this thread
as lost like all your others.

[bates2012]

The only thing I can add is film just has a different "look" than
video. As soon as a movie comes on, its obvious which it was shot on.
Video is "bright", film has a more subdued, "dimmer" look to it, at
least to me. Either is fine with me.
As to all the specs and such, I dont worry about all that, as long as
the damn thing will play :o)
NB

[Winston_Smith]

On Fri, 6 Jul 2012 01:17:18 -0700 (PDT), Mighty Wannabe
<wannabe...@gmail.com> wrote:

>But wait: each film pixel represents true R, G and B data, not the
>softer Bayer interpolated data from digital camera sensors. A single-
>chip 87 MP digital camera still couldn't see details as fine as a
>piece of 35mm film.
>
>Since the lie factor factor from digital cameras is about two, you'd
>need a digital camera of about 87 x 2 = 175 MP to see every last
>detail that makes onto film.

In a nutshell.

35 mm still photography film area is 2.23 times the area used for
movies.

Color film has three emulsion layers so your factor of three comes
from three layers, not one. In digital it's there in something
similar to phase information (effectively multiple channels)

175 MP / 3 / 2.23 = 26 MP. Yes, I can find such a camera.

Additionally - speaking of soft data - film resolution is measured at
about the 70% contrast point. If I require the film to produce a
black black and a white white - such as defined by discrete pixels -
instead of dark and light gray, the film resolution is a lot less.

[Winston_Smith]

On Fri, 6 Jul 2012 11:51:02 -0700 (PDT), bates2012
<bate...@hushmail.com> wrote:

>The only thing I can add is film just has a different "look" than
>video. As soon as a movie comes on, its obvious which it was shot on.
>Video is "bright", film has a more subdued, "dimmer" look to it, at
>least to me. Either is fine with me.
>As to all the specs and such, I dont worry about all that, as long as
>the damn thing will play :o)

You are exactly right. The difference is what's called the MTF
(Modulation Transfer Function). It's how different real world
brightness is represented in an image.

The eye is capable of accepting a much bigger range of brightness
levels at the same time than any camera. The camera must convert
input to output brightness in a non-linear way.

http://www.clarkvision.com/articles/dynamicrange2/
Figure 6 shows a curve.
In a non-existent, perfect camera, that curve would be a straight line
covering four or five decades of brightness. The actual shape of the
curve is S-shaped, being more or less linear in the middle. The
specific shape represents how real brightness is mapped to the image
brightness in any particular medium. There is some difference between
brands of film. There is a big difference between film, analog TV
video, and digital video.

That's why old kinescopes of TV look so flat, they involve three
conversions - analog TV video, to film, and back to analog TV video
again. You could also easily tell live vs videotape when that tape
came out. It's much better than film delay, but not the same as live.

Something very similar accounts for the difference in sound from an
analog record and a digital CD made from the same master. Even
between 78s and LPs.

The good news is digital systems have a bigger dynamic range and can
mimic earlier systems if they want to. At this point, it's an
artistic decision how the photographer wants their output to look.

[Larry]

In article <jt5uk2$oei$2...@dont-email.me>, newsnine...@woa.com.au says...

http://cyberinsecure.com/serious-vulnerability-in-private-bittorrent-
trackers/

http://ucf.academia.edu/DarshanPurandare/Papers/675575/Security_Issues_in_Bit
Torrent_like_P2P_Streaming_Systems

http://torrentfreak.com/bittorrent-clients-vulnerable-to-remote-dos-attack-
080117/

http://www.cvedetails.com/vulnerability-list/vendor_id-7690/Bittorrent.html

[Mighty Wannabe]

That's what you get when you live in the Australian outback. You must
still be watching the "Flying Nun" everyday.

[Mighty Wannabe]

You are totally out to lunch in reading that article.

Try to Google up "Bayer pattern". Each pixel in a digital camera's
sensor is only one three primary colours (Red, Green and Blue).

You have no idea how it works and you are just yapping away.

[terryc]

On 07/07/12 08:01, Larry wrote:
> In article<jt5uk2$oei$2...@dont-email.me>, newsnine...@woa.com.au says...
>>
>> On 06/07/12 15:40, Larry wrote:
>>> In article<653a1347-7b5a-4c62-94bc-be30583043f3
>>> @b13g2000yql.googlegroups.com>, wannabe...@gmail.com says...
>>>
>>>> If you have a computer and internet access, you can free load latest
>>>> movies using a Bit-Torrent client program.
>>>
>>> Bit-Torrent is the least secure digital connection you can use. It lays your
>>> computer wide open to invasion.
>>
>> It does? Please explain?
>> As far as I knew it jst transfers bits of files from many servers and
>> put the various bits back to gether to make the whole. It is actually
>> just a protocol (, plus a specific application implimenting the protocol
>> and anow a website.)
>
> http://cyberinsecure.com/serious-vulnerability-in-private-bittorrent-
> trackers/

Sigh, for the TRACKER (o where the files can be found), aka one computer
system. Note the false claim about admin right. This XCSS exploit does
not give you admin rights.

>
> http://ucf.academia.edu/DarshanPurandare/Papers/675575/Security_Issues_in_Bit
> Torrent_like_P2P_Streaming_Systems

Umm, read again. Bittorrent is NOT the problem, but rather other
arseholes who post crap asdesireable content(like that is somethng new),
don't do their share of shareing(woopee do, call the Numbyaa {Police),
etc. FFS, you have these peoblem everywhere.

>
> http://torrentfreak.com/bittorrent-clients-vulnerable-to-remote-dos-attack-
> 080117/

Oh golly gosh, would you look at this....

So far, the problem appears to affect these clients:

– BitTorrent 6.0 (build 5535)
– uTorrent 1.7.5 (build 4602)
– uTorrent 1.8 (alpha 7834)

and don't miss the date of that article

January 17, 2008

Oh FFS, this is how open software works you dipshit. People find a bug
and they immediately publish it, so that every user is warned ad the
code developers/writters can get busy fixing it. Now if you had a
proprietary Microsoft product, you would be told and you can wait years
for them to fix it.

BTW (D)DOS attack affect just about EVERYTHING.


>
> http://www.cvedetails.com/vulnerability-list/vendor_id-7690/Bittorrent.html

So typical normal programming in C causes problems. Woopee do. Yep, that
is right, C(and derivative) programmers are basically incompetent
compared to programmers in other languages as they just won't do the
basic input data checks that they should be doing. This happens in evey
bit of C??? code.

[Mighty Wannabe]

It is a known fact that the advantage of film over digital is the
"dynamic range". A film has a natural tolerance of extremely high
contrast because the chemicals in film cannot be saturated as easily
as a digital sensor.

That means film camera is extremely good in taking pictures with
scenes in high contrast. When you take pictures of a wedding couple in
white wedding gown and black tuxedo, with digital you will either have
a white-out on the bride's white gown, or a black-out on the groom's
tuxedo, but with film you don't have that problem because the
chemicals in the film are not as easily saturated by the strong light.

[Mighty Wannabe]

On Jul 6, 3:15 pm, Winston_Smith <inva...@butterfly.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 6 Jul 2012 01:17:18 -0700 (PDT), Mighty Wannabe
>

The "Bayer pattern" in digital camera means each pixel is only 1/3 of
the necessary R, G, B to represent the real colour at that pixel. The
camera processor has to interpolate the 2 missing colours from its
neighbouring pixels.

Please educate yourself in "Bayer pattern" so you can figure out what
the author means by "a lie factor of 2".

[Winston_Smith]

What article was that ?

>Try to Google up "Bayer pattern". Each pixel in a digital camera's
>sensor is only one three primary colours (Red, Green and Blue).

I'm fully aware of that. Just as each emulsion layer in film "is only
one three primary colours (Red, Green and Blue)". And one of them
gets the image diffused though the other two. Now you will tell us
that sharpens the image.

>You have no idea how it works and you are just yapping away.

Gee, made a good living in the electro-optical field for 50 years.
Damn, gotta tell my boss some guy on the internet thinks I don't know
anything.

By the way, neat how you skip noticing that you continue to confuse
35mm movie format with 4x5" graphics cameras.