Posted on October 13th, 2007 in General by TheMysteriousX

*after 5 hours of setting up printer setting up*

[06:57:45] <TMX> do you know what makes me happy?
[06:57:52] <TMX> the sound of my printer snapping into life on the other side of the room when I click the print button ^_^
[06:59:08] <TMX> do you know what the really funny thing is though
[06:59:18] <TMX> I wanted to print something 5 hours ago
[06:59:23] <TMX> but it turns out
[06:59:28] <TMX> and this is the funny part
[06:59:31] <TMX> I have no paper
[06:59:33] * TMX cries

So, how was your Saturday morning?

Coincidence?

Posted on August 2nd, 2007 in General by TheMysteriousX

I think not.

coincidence.png

Captain Picard has no hair.  Voldemort has no hair.  You be the judge.

BBC iPlayer

Posted on August 1st, 2007 in General by TheMysteriousX

I’ve been using the BBC iPlayer for a few hours now.  For those not in the know, the BBC iPlayer is a content distribution platform for BBC programming.

In non-technical language, it’s a download client for BBC TV shows.iplayer.png

While nothing new (you’ve been able to download TV from the internet for quite a while), it does have the advantage of being legal (which one of my housemates from last year knows plenty about).

It’s based on the Kontiki platform, which is amongst others, also the basis for 4od.  While both do pretty much the same thing, the BBC’s offering is a lot more polished, despite only being in the beta phase.  Unlike 4od, the Kontiki client is used only for downloads, not for watching the video, or browsing for them.

While the BBC site blocks Vista users from downloading, it does work fine on Windows Vista.  Downloading the program from an XP machine and transferring it was problem free, and the whole program seems to work flawlessly, unlike 4od, which while it is based on the same platform, it suffers from multiple issues.

Playing is done through Windows Media Player (though you can watch them inside the client if you are insane), and browing is done through Internet Explorer, which has the handy advantage of allowing you to bookmark favourite shows so you don’t need to hunt for them every time.

It is lacking a few shows, Heroes is not on there, and for a service for use by over 16s, there are an awful lot of childrens shows.

One fault it shares with the 4od client is the speed of its downloads.  On my 4 megabit connection, I should have completed a download in less than an hour, but after an hour and a half, it has only completed 20%.

Out of all the TV on demand services I have tried (4od, Joost!, iPlayer, Vuze), iPlayer is probably the best in terms of content.  In terms of speed, Joost! is by far the fastest, video, where possible, is streamed straight to the client.  It also has the advantage of officially being supported on Windows Vista, and on Mac OS X.

The iPlayer service is still accepting signups, so why not give it a try?

Marketing Dept. of the Year

Posted on August 1st, 2007 in General by TheMysteriousX

Someone at Abby has really earned their keep this week.

From next month, Abby will no longer adminster bank charges to those who go overdrawn.

Instead, an “instant overdraft” will be set up, which incurs an “Instant Overdraft Setup Fee”, which, coincidently, works out to be almost the same cost as a bank charge.

Sheer genius.

01082007056.jpg

Phone post

Posted on July 26th, 2007 in General by TheMysteriousX



Phone post

Originally uploaded by The Mysterious X


Thu 26/07/2007 15:09 26072007041 Testing mobile phone posting.

Greetings Traveller

Posted on April 24th, 2007 in General by TheMysteriousX

You have probably come to this site wondering why that cute picture of a cat you had in your forum signature has been replaced with a something obscene.

The answer, is because you are a thief.

Every time someone views that image, 20 KB is downloaded from my server. Last month, it cost me over a gigabyte of bandwidth, bandwidth which *I* pay for, not you.

Feel free to use the image, but put it on imageshack or photobucket or flikr

Sorry to be so harsh, but hopefully you have learned why hotlinking is bad.

1153930309570.jpg

And don’t even think about hotlinking this image. Cause I can swap it out at the snap of my fingers.

Blue!

Posted on January 29th, 2007 in General by TheMysteriousX

^^

In addition to changing the colour, the engine has been upgraded to wordpress 2.1, the latest version of the theme has been added, and, the URL has changed.  The old URL will still work for a while (I’ve used something us techies call a 301 permanant redirect) butt it will eventually be switched off.

Horney Wiki Sexual Slang

Posted on January 22nd, 2007 in General by TheMysteriousX

I like to think my readers are a nice, friendly normal bunch.  However, I was browsing through the log files that this site generates, and came across the search history.

It’s a record of every search term that someone has used, on google, yahoo, or the like.  Given the nature of the quotes page, and other material on the website, I do get some odd searches bringing people here.

However.  It would appear that one of the people has been to the site, is in need of desperate help.

horney_wiki_sexual_slangs.png

I know there is some pretty foul stuff on the internet, and if you can think of a fetish, someone has probably already thought of it, filmed it, and put it up on youtube, but this…

If you are returning to this site, and read this, I beg you to seek help, for the benefit of humanity.

So, if you live in Argentina (for that’s where this user was from), be on your guard.

Away from computer

Posted on December 18th, 2006 in General by TheMysteriousX

I will be away from my main computer for a while.  If you have emailed me something, and have not yet recieved a reply, you will not get one this year.  If you need a response quickly, phone me.
If you need to contact me, then you can phone me.  If you don’t have my phone number, you either probably don’t need to contact me urgently, or are a fool and have forgotten it (I haven’t changed my mobile number ever, so if you have one written down for me, it’s that one).

Slashdot Comment

Posted on November 26th, 2006 in General by TheMysteriousX

Link to TFA

And I come to the stark realisation that I probably should have used the coraleCDN. Oh well, near the end of the month so more bandwidth soon :)

so lets see.

If he uses 3 shapes, and 5 colours, that’s 13 possibilities per “dot”. For example, Circle, Square, Triangle, Red, Blue, Green, Black, White. All he has to do, s find another 3 permutations, and he has 16 options per pixel. For those of you out there that didn’t notice, white can’t have a shape, as the paper is white.

If the data to be stored were to be translated into hexidecimal, you can store 1 hexidecimal digit per “dot”.

1 Hex digit is equivalent to a nibble, so for every 2 dots you have encoded one byte.

256 gigabytes is 274877906944 bytes. Now, most printers can easily do 1200 dpi. This is linear DPI though, so they can actually do 1440000 dots per square inch. Now, if we assume that we would need at least 9 dots to do all three shapes:

. .
. .

 .
. .

 .
. .
 .

As shown above, that reduces the shape density to 360000 shapes per square inch, or 180000 bits per square inch.

A4 paper which is almost foolscap has an area of 96.6763 square inches, so we can store, using my methods, 17401734 bytes, so 16 megabytes, much higher than people here so far have been claiming, and using very, very conservative colour choices and resolutions.

While this is an order of magnitude away from the stated values, this could easily be much higher.

I have assumed a very low resolution (laser printers can easily get up to 2000 DPI these days), no compression, and a very restricted subset of values. I should think it would be easily possible to use 8 bit colour, with no risk of data loss.

Add to this 8 to 14 conversion, or parity values, to ensure data integrity, and I think that what this guy is claiming is within the realms of possibility.

FYI, using 8 bit colour which yields 256 possibilities

3×256-3 = 765
765 is almost 3 bytes per dot
using 2000 DPI,
2000×2000 is 4000000 divided by 9 is 444444 shapes per square inch.

444444×3 makes 1333332 bytes per square inch.
so, 128901604 bytes per sheet of A4
which is 128 megabytes per sheet of A4.

So as you can see, it’s not a case of “is it possible to fit that much data”, it’s just a case of howdetailed it has to be; add another shape, and the desity per dot goes up massively,

. .
 .
. .

maybe?

Is it possible to fit 256 gigs of data on a sheet of A4 with ink?: Yes.
Is it possible to retrieve it?: Possibly, depends how small you go.

If you want precendent, think how small the pits are on a Blu Ray disk are; if we can retrieve a single bit from something that small, can we can surely retrieve something a bit bigger and a bit more detailed.

My maths isn’t to strong, so if I’ve made a mistake, feel free to correct me.

Next Page »