Is there anything that the rapist John Bunt isn't an expert on?
The Rapists Blog
GF's little place on the web
High Definition � or not?
Monday, November 2, 2009 at 2:34 pm
As regular readers of the old blog will recall, some time ago I went out
and bought a top of the range 46" Samsung Series 7 RGB LED backlight LCD
screen / monitor / telly.
Currently it is sat in my mother's house, it was initially connected to
the bog standard Virgin TV package, but the picture was so awful
(compared to what the 1080p screen is capable of displaying) that I
upgraded her to the Virgin HD package.
Only a few of the channels on Virgin HD are broadcast in "HD", the rest
are up-sampled to 1920 x 1080 by the HD box, and of the few channels
that are in HD, I honestly cannot tell if they are up-sampled 720i or
1080i, the picture quality is so awful.
Now remember, I have run this screen off my own created 1080p material,
shot on a 1080p HD video camera, so I *know* what the screen is capable of.
The fact is, saying 480i or 720i or 720p or 1080i or 1080p doesn't
actually tell you anything except the resolution the picture is actually
displayed in, it does not tell you a damn thing about the actual
resolution of the picture itself, nor the amount of information used to
refresh that picture for the next frame in the sequence of video.
That metric is actually measured in bandwidth.
Many of you will be familiar with mp3 format music, so let me give you
an audio analogy.
The various formats such as 480i, 720p, 1080i, you can think of, in
audio terms, as mono, stereo, quadrophonic, 5.1 surround, etc etc.
What Virgin, and everyone else, are doing is this.
"Mono is crap, you need stereo at least, and ideally 5.1 surround,
upgrade and buy this product!"
So, people go out and buy a 5.1 surround sound system, it may be crap,
or it may be actually capable of exceeding the audio spec.
They plug this new system into Virgin / Sky / Freesat / whatever, and lo
and behold, they get different noises out of different speakers, and it
does, subjectively, sound better.
But, in audio terms, they have gone from 64 kBit mono to 92 kBit 5.1,
(we are talking bandwidth here) so it only sounds better subjectively.
You have gone from 1 channel using 64 kBit, to 5 channels sharing 92
kBit, or about 20 kBit per channel, when you should have had 5 x 64 =
320 kBit to get the SAME SOUND QUALITY on each channel as you had in 64
kBit mono.
The fact is, to get anything even approaching half decent 5.1 surround
sound, 92 kBit simply is not enough, you need 256 KBit as a minimum, 320
kBit is starting to get somewhere.
It is the same with "HD" video, you need about 25 MBit/sec to really
carry all the information that a 1080p display can use, but in practical
terms 15 MBit/sec is enough to fool everyone except the expert that you
are in fact getting the full bandwidth, a bit like only real audiophiles
can tell the difference between 192 kBit mp3 and a full audio CD sound.
So what do we get when watching Virgin HD?
It varies, thanks to variable compression and the marketing requirement
to get 150 channels of time shifted, repeat, crap programming into the
bandwidth available for 20 decent HD channels, and annoyingly, and
deliberately, the HD channels are stuffed with stuff that does not
actually show HD off, because after all, you can't have paying customers
going from an HD channel in your package to a normal channel, and
noticing a truly crap picture by comparison.
So, in reality, we get between 2 and 4 Mbit/sec when watching the 1920 x
1080 "HD" output of the Virgin HD service, which is like listening to 92
kBit audio in 5.1, and it gets even worse if you have a decent screen,
because it is then like listening to 92 kBit 5.1 audio on a state of the
art 5.1 audio system, it is little short of torture, there are as many
artifacts (artificial bits of data created by the decompression and
up-sampling processes) as there are bits of signal.
I have spent the past day researching this, and, at least here in the
UK, no broadcaster publishes the bandwidth of any of their channels, and
of course no broadcaster publishes a minimum bandwidth for any channel.
In my own experimentation (and I did many practical experiments to
determine this) the point at which a 1080p picture became degraded
enough to be actually noticeable while watching was around the 12
Mbit/sec mark, so that forms a useful metric.
(Please, please, please, do not point me at all the people on various AV
forums who think the picture quality they get is excellent, not one of
them has ever seen true 1080p @ 15 MBit/sec +)
Sadly, in consumer-land this means marketing droids either dividing the
number of channels available by 7 (no big deal, dump the shopping
channels, and all the +1 hour dupe channels, and you just divided by 3
anyway) or the bean counters shelling out for an infrastructure capable
of 7 times the bandwidth.
Part of the problem here is that NOBODY in any of the standards bodies
decided to bother with anything except picture resolution, and the
number of frames per second, NOBODY paid even the slightest bit of
attention to bandwidth, with the result that while the full studio
recording bandwidth of 1080p can be as high as 3 Gbit/sec (uncompressed)
or more normally 60 Mbit/sec, what used to be known as "broadcast
quality" e.g. the signal quality actually sent TO the transmitters, when
it comes to the consumer actually receiving this "HD" signal in their
homes, 2 Mbit/sec still is not too puny to legally qualify as "HD".
Oh, and your gold plated 50 quid HDMI cable rated at 1.5 Gbit/sec really
isn't going to make any difference when the decoder box only has 2 to 4
Mbit/sec going in.
When will this state of affairs change?
Obviously not for MANY years, if left to commercial sources alone.
So my advice is sure, buy a 1080p set if you plan on connecting it to a
PC, to a games box capable of 1080p, or to a Blu-ray or HD-DVD player,
or a 1080p HD video camera.
DO NOT EVER connect any television service, of any kind, to a 1080p set.
Instead, buy a FAR cheaper 720i / 720p set to connect to the television
service, and unless your viewing room is 30 feet long, stick to
something 32" or smaller.
Virgin is being binned from my mother's, a one off spend of �150 on a
FreesatHD install will give higher bandwidth per channel and no
until-you-die monthly expenditure.
Peace.
Grant
"The Rapists Blog" <j...@surfbaud.org> wrote in message
news:4af032f2$0$9752$6e1e...@read.cnntp.org...> High Definition � or not?
> Monday, November 2, 2009 at 2:34 pm
>
> As regular readers of the old blog will recall, some time ago I went out
> and bought a top of the range 46" Samsung Series 7 RGB LED backlight LCD
> screen / monitor / telly.
>
Richard
> www.surfbaud.org
>
> GF's little place on the web
> FreesatHD install will give higher bandwidth per channel and no
> until-you-die monthly expenditure.
>
> Peace.
bunt knows very little about anything much!................in the
months leading up to his case being struck out as an abuse of process,
that had come about due entirely to his ignorance of simple legal
procedures, he had been shouting from the rooftops he was a legal
expert etc etc etc!
There was also some ridiculous nonsense about repairing a cast iron
engine block with a silly little £50 chinese welding machine. Was
highly amusing when the prick posted this crap on a stationary engine
forum, and someone who appeared to be a real expert in this area
ripped bunty to shreds over this.................lol
Andrew Taylor
education and then a formal apprenticeship in engineering. This makes him
qualified to talk on things mechanical or electrical. He also has the
brainpower to research any subject and come up with an informed reply like
the one you quote. I don't see anything in his reply that would be
incorrect.
The best television picture I have seen is a Samsung HD television and a
Blue Ray disk showing Kung Fu Panda in our local Walmart store. The picture
is so good you can see the individula strands of fur on the panda.
We have cable TV here in Canada and it is inferior to satellite.
Now before all you idiots spout about court cases and legal advice and such,
I will say I am not interested. With a little professional advice the
outcome would have been a lot different and the spouters of bollocks would
be silenced or behind bars..
In the words of GF, 'Peace'.
"The Rapists Blog" <j...@surfbaud.org> wrote in message
news:4af032f2$0$9752$6e1e...@read.cnntp.org...
> www.surfbaud.org
>
> GF's little place on the web
> High Definition � or not?
> Virgin is being binned from my mother's, a one off spend of �150 on a
Richard
steady job, or the ability to "research" simple matters of legal
procedure, which is something that resulted in £40K unpaid legal
costs!
In regard to the court case, the fact that bunts statements of claim
were peppered with ridiculous assertions which strongly suggested he
is mentally ill, was not something that was likely to increase his
chances of assuring that his chief tormentor wancox, was going to
receive a long prison term.................
n Nov 4, 5:46 am, "Andrew Taylor" <mississa...@spamcopSUBVERSIVE.com>
wrote:
> Well you have to realise that GF received a classic, private school
> education and then a formal apprenticeship in engineering. This makes him
> qualified to talk on things mechanical or electrical. He also has the
> brainpower to research any subject and come up with an informed reply like
> the one you quote. I don't see anything in his reply that would be
> incorrect.
>
> The best television picture I have seen is a Samsung HD television and a
> Blue Ray disk showing Kung Fu Panda in our local Walmart store. The picture
> is so good you can see the individula strands of fur on the panda.
>
> We have cable TV here in Canada and it is inferior to satellite.
>
> Now before all you idiots spout about court cases and legal advice and such,
> I will say I am not interested. With a little professional advice the
> outcome would have been a lot different and the spouters of bollocks would
> be silenced or behind bars..
>
> In the words of GF, 'Peace'.
>
> "The Rapists Blog" <j...@surfbaud.org> wrote in messagenews:4af032f2$0$9752$6e1e...@read.cnntp.org...
Cynic
wrote:
>www.surfbaud.org
>
>GF's little place on the web
>High Definition � or not?
>Monday, November 2, 2009 at 2:34 pm
>
>As regular readers of the old blog will recall, some time ago I went out
>and bought a top of the range 46" Samsung Series 7 RGB LED backlight LCD
>screen / monitor / telly.
I cannot comment on any of the other allegations being made about the
person in question, but the quote in your post seems to be completely
accurate to me, so I am mystified as to why you believe that it proves
anything detrimental about the knowlege of the person that you
obviously have a running feud with.
The fact that you appear to believe that it *does* indicate a lack of
knowlege on his part is an indication that it is yourself who is
ignorant on the subject.
--
Cynic
Harold
> On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 13:41:03 +0000, The Rapists Blog <j...@surfbaud.org>
> wrote:
>
>> www.surfbaud.org
>>
>> GF's little place on the web
>> Monday, November 2, 2009 at 2:34 pm
>>
>> As regular readers of the old blog will recall, some time ago I went out
>> and bought a top of the range 46" Samsung Series 7 RGB LED backlight LCD
>> screen / monitor / telly.
>
> I cannot comment on any of the other allegations being made about the
> person in question, but the quote in your post seems to be completely
> accurate to me, so I am mystified as to why you believe that it proves
> anything detrimental about the knowlege of the person that you
> obviously have a running feud with.
>
> The fact that you appear to believe that it *does* indicate a lack of
> knowlege on his part is an indication that it is yourself who is
> ignorant on the subject.
>
Why did he buy/steal it in the first place if it's such a heap of shit?
His knowledge of electrical items is like his knowledge of welding and
law non-existent.
Richard
bunt is in actual fact someone who spends many hours on the net, and
the content of his post about HD television (something that would be
rather difficult to afford for someone on state benefits!), will be a
cut and paste job, that I imagine has come about due to him wanting
people that read it to think he is a person of some means!
When he himself holds forth, the views expressed obviously are coming
from a person who has little or no first hand experience of the
subject themselves, and are merely his own skewed interpretations of
things he has seen posted on the net.
Cynic
wrote:
>>> As regular readers of the old blog will recall, some time ago I went out
>>> and bought a top of the range 46" Samsung Series 7 RGB LED backlight LCD
>>> screen / monitor / telly.
>> I cannot comment on any of the other allegations being made about the
>> person in question, but the quote in your post seems to be completely
>> accurate to me, so I am mystified as to why you believe that it proves
>> anything detrimental about the knowlege of the person that you
>> obviously have a running feud with.
>> The fact that you appear to believe that it *does* indicate a lack of
>> knowlege on his part is an indication that it is yourself who is
>> ignorant on the subject.
>Why did he buy/steal it in the first place if it's such a heap of shit?
If you read what he wrote, you'll see that what he bought was
perfectly OK. It simply served to show up the deficiencies in another
system. Like getting a new pair of glasses and suddenly realising how
ugly your wife is :-)
>His knowledge of electrical items is like his knowledge of welding and
>law non-existent.
And how good is your knowlege of those things?
--
Cynic
Cynic
wrote:
>bunt is in actual fact someone who spends many hours on the net, and
>the content of his post about HD television (something that would be
>rather difficult to afford for someone on state benefits!), will be a
>cut and paste job, that I imagine has come about due to him wanting
>people that read it to think he is a person of some means!
It is usually trivial to expose a cut-and-paste job. Simply put a few
phrases into a search engine and find the article it was taken from.
So no doubt you will be able to post a link that supports your
allegation?
--
Cynic
Big G
Bunt knows so much about HDTV that he is unemployed and scrapping old
cars for �10 a time.
Grant
"The Rapists Blog" <j...@surfbaud.org> wrote in message
news:4af032f2$0$9752$6e1e...@read.cnntp.org...
> www.surfbaud.org
>
>
> terms, as mono, stereo, quadrophonic, 5.1 surround, etc etc.
>
> What Virgin, and everyone else, are doing is this.
>
>
Cable picture quality is in my opinion crap compared to Sky and in HD the
difference is even greater.
>
> "Mono is crap, you need stereo at least, and ideally 5.1 surround, upgrade
> and buy this product!"
>
> So, people go out and buy a 5.1 surround sound system, it may be crap, or
> it may be actually capable of exceeding the audio spec.
>
>
> They plug this new system into Virgin / Sky / Freesat / whatever, and lo
> and behold, they get different noises out of different speakers, and it
> does, subjectively, sound better.
>
> But, in audio terms, they have gone from 64 kBit mono to 92 kBit 5.1, (we
> are talking bandwidth here) so it only sounds better subjectively.
>
384Kbps
>
> You have gone from 1 channel using 64 kBit, to 5 channels sharing 92 kBit,
> or about 20 kBit per channel, when you should have had 5 x 64 = 320 kBit
> to get the SAME SOUND QUALITY on each channel as you had in 64 kBit mono.
>
> The fact is, to get anything even approaching half decent 5.1 surround
> sound, 92 kBit simply is not enough, you need 256 KBit as a minimum, 320
> kBit is starting to get somewhere.
>
do not, but he does claim they all use 92 bits which is wrong.
>
>
>
>
> So my advice is sure, buy a 1080p set if you plan on connecting it to a
> PC, to a games box capable of 1080p, or to a Blu-ray or HD-DVD player, or
> a 1080p HD video camera.
>
> DO NOT EVER connect any television service, of any kind, to a 1080p set.
>
> Instead, buy a FAR cheaper 720i / 720p set to connect to the television
> service, and unless your viewing room is 30 feet long, stick to something
> 32" or smaller.
>
one produces the better picture? well it aint the 720 so just don't listen
to Bunt on this its bollocks.
>
And the comment about size of room to screen size is bollocks aswell with
sky hd 1080i on the 1080p screen you can actually sit closer to the screen
than you can on a lower res feed/screen. The pixels are some much
finer/higher res the closer you get the more detail you can see, unlike a
lower res screen or plasma where the closer you get all you can see are
pixel/cells.
Grant
"The Rapists Blog" <j...@surfbaud.org> wrote in message
news:4af032f2$0$9752$6e1e...@read.cnntp.org...
> www.surfbaud.org
>
>
> no broadcaster publishes the bandwidth of any of their channels, and of
> course no broadcaster publishes a minimum bandwidth for any channel.
>
>
http://www.linowsat.co.uk/mainpage.html
Andrew Taylor
news:ac46fb93-4e45-4893...@m38g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
Interesting points of view Andrew.................having met bunt
twice I wasnt sure that he had had any sort of education at all, as
he simply didnt seem to understand quite what was going on! The thing
that does strike you about bunt though, is that for those that are
gullible or dim he is quite able to put across a good line in
bullshit!
So you have met him 18 times (or therabouts) less than I have? Neat! You
didn't see him on this forum run rings around someone who thought they knew
classic Latin!
As to him ever having trained as an engineer, some of the suggestions
he made on a stationary engine forum, which is frequented by real
engineers, seemed to be saying bunt is little more than a fool with a
big mouth and a net connection!
Did the repair on that stationary engine hold? Simple question, yes or no?
Finally even if bunt had been able to come to grips with simple
matters of legal procedure, the fact that he had lied through his back
teeth in his submitted statements of claim, the only people likely to
have been convicted of anything, were him himself and his associate
wancox (for attempting to pervert the course of justice).
Post proof of the lies. I watched the whole of the UKLSW debacle and saw
none of it.
On Nov 4, 5:46 am, "Andrew Taylor" <mississa...@spamcopSUBVERSIVE.com>
wrote:
> Well you have to realise that GF received a classic, private school
> education and then a formal apprenticeship in engineering. This makes him
> qualified to talk on things mechanical or electrical. He also has the
> brainpower to research any subject and come up with an informed reply like
> the one you quote. I don't see anything in his reply that would be
> incorrect.
>
> The best television picture I have seen is a Samsung HD television and a
> Blue Ray disk showing Kung Fu Panda in our local Walmart store. The
> picture
> is so good you can see the individula strands of fur on the panda.
>
> We have cable TV here in Canada and it is inferior to satellite.
>
> Now before all you idiots spout about court cases and legal advice and
> such,
> I will say I am not interested. With a little professional advice the
> outcome would have been a lot different and the spouters of bollocks would
> be silenced or behind bars..
Richard
In regard to bunty being a bit of a fibber I dont really need to post
proof of this............he has provided this himself! The suggestion
made in one of his submitted statements of claim, that being taunted
on here had resulted in his having become impotent, at the very same
time he made a rather dim and unfortunate teenage girl pregnant, seems
to me to provide pretty conclusive proof!
Concerning bunts attempts to repair cast iron, If you mend the leaking
roof of your house, with car body filler the bodged repair may well
last a while, but is certainly not the type of thing anyone who claims
to be a professional roofer would be likely to suggest in public!
bunts knowledge of engineering seems to be extremely limited, and what
he does know appears to be coming from someone who has had little or
no experience of actually doing any of this type of
work.........................
Finally why anyone in their right mind would want to spring to the
defence of someone who has been accused of abusing a mental defective,
as well as being an aficionado and fan of "extreme" porn, is something
that I find very very strange, unless of course the person doing the
defending has the same type of interests as the abuser possibly!
Richard
wrote:
> "The Rapists Blog" <j...@surfbaud.org> wrote in messagenews:4af032f2$0$9752$6e1e...@read.cnntp.org...>www.surfbaud.org
We all know bunt talks out of his arse, so why bother to post proof of
the fact! Lets hope there is still a chance of him doing time for
abusing the mental defective teen......................
Grant
"Cynic" <cyni...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:2573f55u8pfo9gnor...@4ax.com...
>
>
> Cynic
>
Is that you Camel?
Cynic
<grahamsut...@tiscali.net> wrote:
>Bunt knows so much about HDTV that he is unemployed and scrapping old
>cars for �10 a time.
Why should the one thing have anything to do with the other? I know
people with good university degrees who stack shelves at supermarkets.
having knowlege does not secure a good job.
The person you refer to may or may not be as bad as you say - but the
arguments you have been using to date have done *nothing* toward
backing up any of your claims about him.
--
Cynic
Richard
The fact that he has abused and sexually assaulting a simple minded
teenage girl, is something that many people might possibly find
distasteful? Or does the fact that this girl is older than the age of
consent, mean that bunty having his wicked way with her, mean that
this is perfectly ok? A complaint of the assault is on file with
Exeter plod, but it would seem as this was made some while after the
assault, there is little chance of securing a conviction.
At the time in 2005 when this same unfortunate girl fell pregnant by
bunt, according to a statement of claim lodged with the RCJ, he was in
fact impotent................a condition that supposedly came about
after he was taunted on here! Hardly the sort of thing that suggests
bunt is someone to be trusted!
Therefore
As a great man once said whatever it is I am against it
..........................Leslie
--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
------->>>>>>http://www.NewsDemon.com<<<<<<------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access
Cynic
wrote:
>> >Bunt knows so much about HDTV that he is unemployed and scrapping old
>> >cars for �10 a time.
>> Why should the one thing have anything to do with the other? �I know
>> people with good university degrees who stack shelves at supermarkets.
>> having knowlege does not secure a good job.
>> The person you refer to may or may not be as bad as you say - but the
>> arguments you have been using to date have done *nothing* toward
>> backing up any of your claims about him.
>The fact that he has abused and sexually assaulting a simple minded
>teenage girl, is something that many people might possibly find
>distasteful?
If someone on Usenet were to claim that *you* had sexually assaulted a
simple minded teenage girl, you will be pleased to know that quoting a
blog from you about HDTV will be unlikely to convice me that the
allegation is true.
--
Cynic
Cynic
<Gr...@Mcleod40.fsnet.co.ku.com> wrote:
>Is that you Camel?
Do some basic research and you will know.
--
Cynic
Richard
The girl herself has accused bunty, not "someone" on usenet! And the
fact bunt is most certainly a liar, is backed up by the fact that at
the time he was suggesting that he was impotent as a result of being
taunted on here, that the very same simple minded teen was made
pregnant by him..............possibly in the view of bunt fans this
was an immaculate conception of some sort?
Dragon Slayer
>
> - Show quoted text -
I cant believe so many fall for the bullshit of the worst pair of
cunts on usenet.
One , a cannabis brain-addled idle benefit scrounger and the other
one , an insane little fat bastard who somehow keeps escaping from the
loony bin
Cynic
wrote:
>> If someone on Usenet were to claim that *you* had sexually assaulted a
>> simple minded teenage girl, you will be pleased to know that quoting a
>> blog from you about HDTV will be unlikely to convice me that the
>> allegation is true.
>The girl herself has accused bunty, not "someone" on usenet! And the
>fact bunt is most certainly a liar, is backed up by the fact that at
>the time he was suggesting that he was impotent as a result of being
>taunted on here, that the very same simple minded teen was made
>pregnant by him..............possibly in the view of bunt fans this
>was an immaculate conception of some sort?
I am not so naive as to believe allegations made by anonymous people
on Usenet without some pretty good supporting evidence.
Post a URL to a media report on his trial and conviction for serious
sexual assault (which would most definitely have happened if your
allegation was anything like the truth), and I might begin taking you
seriously. Until then, it is just another set of outrageous personal
attacks on someone I don't know by someone else I don't know, and you
have zero credibility. Goodbye.
--
Cynic
Richard
So says the person who sucks up to rapists, and provides them with a
substantial cash payment, to avoid being had over in
court..................
By the way wancox you still haven't explained to everyone who wasnt at
Exeter district registry in 2006, why exactly the a case against you
was struck out! Maybe to do so might suggest you are a most certainly
a "loony" yourself...............lol
Richard
Indeed...................maybe you are the type of person who would
ask for details of bliar's convictions for war crimes, before
believing he played any part in the cowardly attacks on the people's
of Kosovo, Afghanistan, and Iraq!
Or perhaps you are someone who thinks that anyone who isnt quite right
in the head can be assaulted and harmed with impunity, and the word of
a liar, cheat, and fraudster such as bunty has much more value than
hers?