Re: setup.exe missing from FTP site

Re: setup.exe missing from FTP site

[Eric Blake]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

According to John Rosauer on 5/22/2007 11:22 PM:
> Hi,
> 
> I just discovered setup.exe is missing from the FTP site,
> ftp://cygwin.com/pub/cygwin/
> 
> regards,
> john

    7      14     107

> The information contained in this communication is confidential, and
...
> responsibility for errors, viruses or interference.

     12     130     828

We have a winner here - an 8:1 ratio in bytes of fluff to content (oh
wait, it is inf:1 in fluff to content, if you consider that the body was
also fluff because he asked a question previously covered on the mailing
list).  Hope no one gets a hangover!

- --
Don't work too hard, make some time for fun as well!

Eric Blake             ebb9@byu.net
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Cygwin)
Comment: Public key at home.comcast.net/~ericblake/eblake.gpg
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFGVDFF84KuGfSFAYARAqpNAKCR7+H/VGpVisbFevylJJ3+ioQVXgCdHRAZ
1A9CIf1dq/ubQL6HykLevCs=
=It78
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

RE: setup.exe missing from FTP site

[Dave Korn]

On 23 May 2007 13:19, Eric Blake wrote:

>  [ ... ]   8:1 ratio in bytes of fluff to content 


  I prefer to express that as an SNR of -18dB :-)


    cheers,
      DaveK
-- 
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....

Re: setup.exe missing from FTP site

[Warren Young]

Dave Korn wrote:
> On 23 May 2007 13:19, Eric Blake wrote:
> 
>>  [ ... ]   8:1 ratio in bytes of fluff to content 
> 
> 
>   I prefer to express that as an SNR of -18dB :-)

Oh, no, please no!  That suggests that mailing list noise is best 
expressed on a logarithmic scale.  The implications of that are too 
horrible.  Say it ain't so!

Re: setup.exe missing from FTP site

[Matthew Woehlke]

Dave Korn wrote:
> On 23 May 2007 13:19, Eric Blake wrote:
>>  [ ... ]   8:1 ratio in bytes of fluff to content 
> 
>   I prefer to express that as an SNR of -18dB :-)

...in which case this | seems appropriate! :-)
                       V
-- 
Matthew
"I can hear you / just barely hear you / I can just barely hear you"
   -- "I Can Hear You", by They Might Be Giants

RE: setup.exe missing from FTP site

[Dave Korn]

On 23 May 2007 22:30, Warren Young wrote:

> Dave Korn wrote:
>> On 23 May 2007 13:19, Eric Blake wrote:
>> 
>>>  [ ... ]   8:1 ratio in bytes of fluff to content
>> 
>> 
>>   I prefer to express that as an SNR of -18dB :-)
> 
> Oh, no, please no!  That suggests that mailing list noise is best
> expressed on a logarithmic scale.  The implications of that are too
> horrible.  Say it ain't so!

http://tinyurl.com/ypfd2a

    cheers,
      DaveK
-- 
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....

SNR calculations (was Re: setup.exe missing from FTP site)

[Linda Walsh]

Dave Korn wrote:
> On 23 May 2007 13:19, Eric Blake wrote:
> 
>>  [ ... ]   8:1 ratio in bytes of fluff to content 
> 
> 
>   I prefer to express that as an SNR of -18dB :-)
---
     Could you please show your work!

     I arrived at -9dB. Work:
         For each doubling/halving of power one adjusts by ~(+/-)3dB.
             (note: "3" is approximation of 10*log(2) or,
                    to 7 decimal places, 3.010900)
		so 1 unit / 2 units of signal would be -3dB,
		   1 unit / 4 units: -6dB,
		   1 unit / 8 units: -9dB

     From my limited understanding, -18dB would be a reduction of 6 factors of
2, or a 1:64 signal/noise ratio.

"Humbly" :-),
    Linda Walsh

Re: SNR calculations (was Re: setup.exe missing from FTP site)

[Brian Dessent]

Linda Walsh wrote:

> >   I prefer to express that as an SNR of -18dB :-)
> ---
>      Could you please show your work!
> 
>      I arrived at -9dB. Work:
>          For each doubling/halving of power one adjusts by ~(+/-)3dB.
>              (note: "3" is approximation of 10*log(2) or,
>                     to 7 decimal places, 3.010900)
>                 so 1 unit / 2 units of signal would be -3dB,
>                    1 unit / 4 units: -6dB,
>                    1 unit / 8 units: -9dB
> 
>      From my limited understanding, -18dB would be a reduction of 6 factors of
> 2, or a 1:64 signal/noise ratio.

Typically you use dB to compare the amount of power in a signal relative
to a fixed reference; in the case of electronics a common reference is
1mV, or 0 dBmV. Since power in a signal is proportional to V^2, when you
compute dBmV from a voltage level it's 20*log(v) due to the power of 2.

But when you just want to use dB to represent a unitless ratio, then I
agree with you it's simply 10*log(ratio).

Brian

RE: SNR calculations (was Re: setup.exe missing from FTP site)

[Dave Korn]

On 26 May 2007 22:47, Brian Dessent wrote:

> Linda Walsh wrote:
> 
>>>   I prefer to express that as an SNR of -18dB :-)
>> ---
>>      Could you please show your work!
>> 
>>      I arrived at -9dB. Work:
>>          For each doubling/halving of power one adjusts by ~(+/-)3dB.
>>              (note: "3" is approximation of 10*log(2) or,
>>                     to 7 decimal places, 3.010900)
>>                 so 1 unit / 2 units of signal would be -3dB,
>>                    1 unit / 4 units: -6dB,
>>                    1 unit / 8 units: -9dB
>> 
>>      From my limited understanding, -18dB would be a reduction of 6
>> factors of 2, or a 1:64 signal/noise ratio.
> 
> Typically you use dB to compare the amount of power in a signal relative
> to a fixed reference; in the case of electronics a common reference is
> 1mV, or 0 dBmV. Since power in a signal is proportional to V^2, when you
> compute dBmV from a voltage level it's 20*log(v) due to the power of 2.
> 
> But when you just want to use dB to represent a unitless ratio, then I
> agree with you it's simply 10*log(ratio).
> 
> Brian


  For purposes of humour, the larger magnitude number is always better.  Hence
I counted 6dB per doubling.  The fact that it was technically correct is a
mere beneficent side-effect!

    cheers,
      DaveK
-- 
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....

RE: SNR calculations (was Re: setup.exe missing from FTP site)

[Igor Peshansky]

On Sat, 26 May 2007, Dave Korn wrote:

> On 26 May 2007 22:47, Brian Dessent wrote:
>
> > Linda Walsh wrote:
> >
> >>>   I prefer to express that as an SNR of -18dB :-)
> >> ---
> >>      Could you please show your work!
> >>
> >>      I arrived at -9dB. Work:
> >>          For each doubling/halving of power one adjusts by ~(+/-)3dB.
> >>              (note: "3" is approximation of 10*log(2) or,
> >>                     to 7 decimal places, 3.010900)
> >>                 so 1 unit / 2 units of signal would be -3dB,
> >>                    1 unit / 4 units: -6dB,
> >>                    1 unit / 8 units: -9dB
> >>
> >>      From my limited understanding, -18dB would be a reduction of 6
> >> factors of 2, or a 1:64 signal/noise ratio.
> >
> > Typically you use dB to compare the amount of power in a signal relative
> > to a fixed reference; in the case of electronics a common reference is
> > 1mV, or 0 dBmV. Since power in a signal is proportional to V^2, when you
> > compute dBmV from a voltage level it's 20*log(v) due to the power of 2.
> >
> > But when you just want to use dB to represent a unitless ratio, then I
> > agree with you it's simply 10*log(ratio).
> >
> > Brian
>
>
>   For purposes of humour, the larger magnitude number is always better.
> Hence I counted 6dB per doubling.  The fact that it was technically
> correct is a mere beneficent side-effect!

Also, you must've anticipated this discussion, which surely lowered the
SNR to -18db or less... :-)
	Igor
-- 
				http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/
      |\      _,,,---,,_	    pechtcha@cs.nyu.edu | igor@watson.ibm.com
ZZZzz /,`.-'`'    -.  ;-;;,_		Igor Peshansky, Ph.D. (name changed!)
     |,4-  ) )-,_. ,\ (  `'-'		old name: Igor Pechtchanski
    '---''(_/--'  `-'\_) fL	a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-.  Meow!

Freedom is just another word for "nothing left to lose"...  -- Janis Joplin

Re: SNR calculations (was Re: setup.exe missing from FTP site)

[Warren Young]

Brian Dessent wrote:
> But when you just want to use dB to represent a unitless ratio, then I
> agree with you it's simply 10*log(ratio).

Yes, bytes are more closely analogous to volts (6 dB per doubling) than 
watts (3 dB per doubling).

This page explains why there are apparently two ways to calculate decibels:

http://arts.ucsc.edu/EMS/Music/tech_background/TE-06/teces_06.html

In actual fact, they're the same calculation, but it's easier to 
understand that in a volts vs. watts (power) context than in the tongue 
in cheek context we have here.

is there any support for stuffit ?

[Mike Marchywka]

Hi,
I just got a sit file and didn't know if there is any support for this.
Do I have to go download the mfg's free trial or is there a cygwin
tool for this?

Thanks.




Mike Marchywka

_________________________________________________________________
Make every IM count. Download Messenger and join the iÂ’m Initiative now. 
ItÂ’s free. http://im.live.com/messenger/im/home/?source=TAGHM_MAY07

RE: is there any support for stuffit ?

[Dave Korn]

On 29 May 2007 18:18, Mike Marchywka wrote:

> Hi,
> I just got a sit file and didn't know if there is any support for this.

  If a hippo sits on it, it's going to need quite a lot of support... neck
brace, leg splint, truss, you name it!

> Do I have to go download the mfg's free trial or is there a cygwin
> tool for this?

  A cygwin tool for "mit freundlich Grüßen"?  Maybe the nearest thing would be
GNU Hello, I believe it's properly internationalised.  Try running it with
LANG=de and see what happens.

> Thanks.

  You should really wait until you see the quality of the advice you get
before you go offering thanks for it!


    cheers,
      DaveK
-- 
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....

RE: SNR calculations (was Re: setup.exe missing from FTP site)

[Dave Korn]

On 29 May 2007 18:12, Warren Young wrote:

> Brian Dessent wrote:
>> But when you just want to use dB to represent a unitless ratio, then I
>> agree with you it's simply 10*log(ratio).
> 
> Yes, bytes are more closely analogous to volts (6 dB per doubling) than
> watts (3 dB per doubling).

  Says who?  If you ask me[*] bytes are most closely analagous to coulombs, as
they are usually represented by stored charges in tiny capacitors.  Except
when they're in transit of course, at which time they are more closely
analagous to photons (FDDI), or electrical current (copper wire), or ink
(printed on scroll of paper and wrapped around carrier pigeon's leg), or even
phonons (compression pulses in mercury column memory).

  Say, what is the square of a photon, anyway?


    cheers,
      DaveK

[*] - which you didn't, but I'm sure you were just about to, and I'm glad that
you did, because I've got a lot of uninformed opinions on the matter....
-- 
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....

Re: is there any support for stuffit ?

[Igor Peshansky]

On Tue, 29 May 2007, Mike Marchywka wrote:

> Hi,
> I just got a sit file and didn't know if there is any support for this.
> Do I have to go download the mfg's free trial or is there a cygwin
> tool for this?

I'm half-tempted to release a Cygwin:stuffit package that doesn't do
anything (with just "WJM" in the README)... :-)

SCNR.
	Igor
-- 
				http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/
      |\      _,,,---,,_	    pechtcha@cs.nyu.edu | igor@watson.ibm.com
ZZZzz /,`.-'`'    -.  ;-;;,_		Igor Peshansky, Ph.D. (name changed!)
     |,4-  ) )-,_. ,\ (  `'-'		old name: Igor Pechtchanski
    '---''(_/--'  `-'\_) fL	a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-.  Meow!

Freedom is just another word for "nothing left to lose"...  -- Janis Joplin

RE: is there any support for stuffit ?

[Dave Korn]

On 29 May 2007 19:06, Igor Peshansky wrote:

> On Tue, 29 May 2007, Mike Marchywka wrote:
> 
>> Hi,
>> I just got a sit file and didn't know if there is any support for this.
>> Do I have to go download the mfg's free trial or is there a cygwin
>> tool for this?
> 
> I'm half-tempted to release a Cygwin:stuffit package that doesn't do
> anything (with just "WJM" in the README)... :-)
> 
> SCNR.
> 	Igor

  ROFL!  I just went to the stuffit expander web page, and one of the
aaaaamazing new features they're hyping is

" Losslessly compress JPEG files with no loss in quality"

  Well, yeh, I understand it's /technically/ true, but they should really say

" Losslessly compress JPEG files with no *more* loss in quality than the
massive loss in quality that you got by converting them to JPEGs in the first
place ... "


    cheers,
      DaveK
-- 
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....

Re: is there any support for stuffit ? [turn into \"jpg compression in Stuffit\" ? ]

[morgan gangwere]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Dave Korn wrote:
> On 29 May 2007 19:06, Igor Peshansky wrote:
> 
>> On Tue, 29 May 2007, Mike Marchywka wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>> I just got a sit file and didn't know if there is any support for this.
>>> Do I have to go download the mfg's free trial or is there a cygwin
>>> tool for this?
>> I'm half-tempted to release a Cygwin:stuffit package that doesn't do
>> anything (with just "WJM" in the README)... :-)
>>
>> SCNR.
>> 	Igor
> 
>   ROFL!  I just went to the stuffit expander web page, and one of the
> aaaaamazing new features they're hyping is
> 
> " Losslessly compress JPEG files with no loss in quality"
> 
>   Well, yeh, I understand it's /technically/ true, but they should really say
> 
> " Losslessly compress JPEG files with no *more* loss in quality than the
> massive loss in quality that you got by converting them to JPEGs in the first
> place ... "
> 
> 
>     cheers,
>       DaveK

well DUuUuUUh. if you put JPG files in ANY compressed format they are
_by_definition_ no more lossy than before.

- --
Just a Thought
Morgan Gangwere

For those who want my PGP key:
http://pengunassasin.kicks-ass.org/pgpKey.html

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFGXHZsCF9T/dUsmAgRAutUAJ439GOHVy+pTU8tqOFEbVVKls/EdgCgpIay
+GskHZ20HjLWSW2X0Rnpalg=
=4PPb
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: is there any support for stuffit ? [turn into \"jpg compression in Stuffit\" ? ]

[Mike Marchywka]

I'm trying to install cygwin from a divx compressed file and it isn't 
working.
The cygwin files were too big so I saved a lot of space by putting them in 
divx format.
Divx hasn't gotten back to me and I assume it is their problem since cygwin 
works
ok in the normal format.
Do you have a utility for that? It worked good on video files.

LOL.




>From: morgan gangwere <0.fractalus@gmail.com>
>Reply-To: The Cygwin-Talk Maiming List <cygwin-talk@cygwin.com>
>To: The Cygwin-Talk Maiming List <cygwin-talk@cygwin.com>
>Subject: Re: is there any support for stuffit ? [turn into \"jpg 
>compression  in Stuffit\" ? ]
>Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 12:52:29 -0600
>
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>Hash: SHA1
>
>Dave Korn wrote:
> > On 29 May 2007 19:06, Igor Peshansky wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, 29 May 2007, Mike Marchywka wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi,
> >>> I just got a sit file and didn't know if there is any support for 
>this.
> >>> Do I have to go download the mfg's free trial or is there a cygwin
> >>> tool for this?
> >> I'm half-tempted to release a Cygwin:stuffit package that doesn't do
> >> anything (with just "WJM" in the README)... :-)
> >>
> >> SCNR.
> >> 	Igor
> >
> >   ROFL!  I just went to the stuffit expander web page, and one of the
> > aaaaamazing new features they're hyping is
> >
> > " Losslessly compress JPEG files with no loss in quality"
> >
> >   Well, yeh, I understand it's /technically/ true, but they should 
>really say
> >
> > " Losslessly compress JPEG files with no *more* loss in quality than the
> > massive loss in quality that you got by converting them to JPEGs in the 
>first
> > place ... "
> >
> >
> >     cheers,
> >       DaveK
>
>well DUuUuUUh. if you put JPG files in ANY compressed format they are
>_by_definition_ no more lossy than before.
>
>- --
>Just a Thought
>Morgan Gangwere
>
>For those who want my PGP key:
>http://pengunassasin.kicks-ass.org/pgpKey.html
>
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32)
>Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
>iD8DBQFGXHZsCF9T/dUsmAgRAutUAJ439GOHVy+pTU8tqOFEbVVKls/EdgCgpIay
>+GskHZ20HjLWSW2X0Rnpalg=
>=4PPb
>-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

_________________________________________________________________
PC Magazine’s 2007 editors’ choice for best Web mail—award-winning Windows 
Live Hotmail. 
http://imagine-windowslive.com/hotmail/?locale=en-us&ocid=TXT_TAGHM_migration_HM_mini_pcmag_0507

RE: is there any support for stuffit ? [turn into \"jpg compression in Stuffit\" ? ]

[Dave Korn]

On 29 May 2007 19:52, morgan gangwere wrote:


>>   ROFL!  I just went to the stuffit expander web page, and one of the
>> aaaaamazing new features they're hyping is
>> 
>> " Losslessly compress JPEG files with no loss in quality"
>> 
>>   Well, yeh, I understand it's /technically/ true, but they should really
>> say 
>> 
>> " Losslessly compress JPEG files with no *more* loss in quality than the
>> massive loss in quality that you got by converting them to JPEGs in the
>> first place ... " 
>> 
>> 
>>     cheers,
>>       DaveK
> 
> well DUuUuUUh. if you put JPG files in ANY compressed format they are
> _by_definition_ no more lossy than before.


  Umm, no, if you put JPG files in "ANY" compressed format, they are
_by_definition_ "compressed".  Nothing else.  It all depends on whether you're
using a *lossless* or *lossy* compression format, which you didn't actually
mention.


    cheers,
      DaveK
-- 
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....

RE: is there any support for stuffit ? [turn into \"jpg compression in Stuffit\" ? ]

[Dave Korn]

On 29 May 2007 20:00, Mike Marchywka wrote:

> I'm trying to install cygwin from a divx compressed file and it isn't
> working.
> The cygwin files were too big so I saved a lot of space by putting them in
> divx format.
> Divx hasn't gotten back to me and I assume it is their problem since cygwin
> works
> ok in the normal format.
> Do you have a utility for that? It worked good on video files.
> 
> LOL.

  You wanna compress files?  YOU WANNA COMPRESS FILES?  *THAT*'S not how you
compress files.  *I'LL SHOW YOU HOW YOU COMPRESS A FILE*....

Step 1:  Preparation
--------------------

PLACE HIPPO HERE-> XXXXX













PLACE FILE HERE->           OOOOO



Step 2:  Release the hippo!
---------------------------

HIPPO WAS HERE  ->
                   <whe        
                      ee   
                        e
                         e
                         ee
                          ee
                           e
                           ee
                            e
                            ee
                             e
                             ee
FILE IS HERE   ->      THUMPkersplat>


Step 3:  Retrieve compressed file!
----------------------------------

HIPPO WAS HERE  -> XXXXX













FILE IS HERE   ->           ooooo  <-- looks like about 50% compression to me.


  For greater compression, either use more hippos, or fatter ones.  ;-)

    cheers,
      DaveK
-- 
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....

Re: is there any support for stuffit ? [turn into \"jpg compression in Stuffit\" ? ]

[Igor Peshansky]

Ugh, top-posting...  Reformatted.

On Tue, 29 May 2007, Mike Marchywka wrote:

> > From: morgan gangwere <0.fractalus@XXXXX.XXX>
> > Reply-To: The Cygwin-Talk Maiming List <cygwin-talk@XXXXXX.XXX>
> > To: The Cygwin-Talk Maiming List <cygwin-talk@XXXXXX.XXX>

<http://cygwin.com/acronyms/#PCYMTNQREAIYR>.  Mindless chatter can feed
the spammers too...

> > Subject: Re: is there any support for stuffit ? [turn into \"jpg compression in Stuffit\" ? ]
> > Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 12:52:29 -0600
> >
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > Dave Korn wrote:
> > > On 29 May 2007 19:06, Igor Peshansky wrote:
> > >
> > >> On Tue, 29 May 2007, Mike Marchywka wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Hi,
> > >>> I just got a sit file and didn't know if there is any support for this.
> > >>> Do I have to go download the mfg's free trial or is there a cygwin
> > >>> tool for this?
> > >> I'm half-tempted to release a Cygwin:stuffit package that doesn't do
> > >> anything (with just "WJM" in the README)... :-)
> > >>
> > >> SCNR.
> > >> 	Igor
> > >
> > >   ROFL!  I just went to the stuffit expander web page, and one of the
> > > aaaaamazing new features they're hyping is
> > >
> > > " Losslessly compress JPEG files with no loss in quality"
> > >
> > >   Well, yeh, I understand it's /technically/ true, but they should
> > > really say
> > >
> > > " Losslessly compress JPEG files with no *more* loss in quality than
> > > the massive loss in quality that you got by converting them to JPEGs
> > > in the first place ... "
> >
> > well DUuUuUUh. if you put JPG files in ANY compressed format they are
> > _by_definition_ no more lossy than before.
>
> I'm trying to install cygwin from a divx compressed file and it isn't
> working.
> The cygwin files were too big so I saved a lot of space by putting them
> in divx format.
> Divx hasn't gotten back to me and I assume it is their problem since
> cygwin works ok in the normal format.
> Do you have a utility for that? It worked good on video files.

Hmm, I wonder what a Fourier transform for Cygwin packages would look
like?  Perhaps "binary files get the lower frequencies, and READMEs, info
pages, etc, get the higher ones"?  Then one could apply JPEG/MPEG
compression as-is to really save space in the installation...  Plus, with
all of the binary diff tools out there, even inter-frame compression is
possible.
	Igor
-- 
				http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/
      |\      _,,,---,,_	    pechtcha@cs.nyu.edu | igor@watson.ibm.com
ZZZzz /,`.-'`'    -.  ;-;;,_		Igor Peshansky, Ph.D. (name changed!)
     |,4-  ) )-,_. ,\ (  `'-'		old name: Igor Pechtchanski
    '---''(_/--'  `-'\_) fL	a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-.  Meow!

Freedom is just another word for "nothing left to lose"...  -- Janis Joplin

RE: is there any support for stuffit ? [turn into \"jpg compression in Stuffit\" ? ]

[Igor Peshansky]

On Tue, 29 May 2007, Dave Korn wrote:

> On 29 May 2007 20:00, Mike Marchywka wrote:
>
> > I'm trying to install cygwin from a divx compressed file and it isn't
> > working.
> > The cygwin files were too big so I saved a lot of space by putting them in
> > divx format.
> > Divx hasn't gotten back to me and I assume it is their problem since cygwin
> > works
> > ok in the normal format.
> > Do you have a utility for that? It worked good on video files.
> >
> > LOL.
>
>   You wanna compress files?  YOU WANNA COMPRESS FILES?  *THAT*'S not how you
> compress files.  *I'LL SHOW YOU HOW YOU COMPRESS A FILE*....
>
> Step 1:  Preparation
> --------------------
>
> PLACE HIPPO HERE-> XXXXX
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> PLACE FILE HERE->           OOOOO
>
>
>
> Step 2:  Release the hippo!
> ---------------------------
>
> HIPPO WAS HERE  ->
>                    <whe
>                       ee
>                         e
>                          e
>                          ee
>                           ee
>                            e
>                            ee
>                             e
>                             ee
>                              e
>                              ee
> FILE IS HERE   ->      THUMPkersplat>
>
>
> Step 3:  Retrieve compressed file!
> ----------------------------------
>
> HIPPO WAS HERE  -> XXXXX
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> FILE IS HERE   ->           ooooo  <-- looks like about 50% compression to me.
>
>
>   For greater compression, either use more hippos, or fatter ones.  ;-)

Shampoo. Rinse. Repeat.
	Igor
-- 
				http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/
      |\      _,,,---,,_	    pechtcha@cs.nyu.edu | igor@watson.ibm.com
ZZZzz /,`.-'`'    -.  ;-;;,_		Igor Peshansky, Ph.D. (name changed!)
     |,4-  ) )-,_. ,\ (  `'-'		old name: Igor Pechtchanski
    '---''(_/--'  `-'\_) fL	a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-.  Meow!

Freedom is just another word for "nothing left to lose"...  -- Janis Joplin

Re: SNR calculations (was Re: setup.exe missing from FTP site)

[Warren Young]

Dave Korn wrote:
>   Say, what is the square of a photon, anyway?

One way to square photons is to make them pass through a sufficiently 
small square hole in an opaque plate.  The squared photons will undergo 
a diffraction distortion, so whether the resulting value is 1 or 0 
(photons visible or not) will depend on the angle between the hole and 
your observation apparatus.

The basic technique has already been studied.  You can see a simulation 
of the results here:

	http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Square_diffraction.jpg

Re: is there any support for stuffit ? [turn into \"jpg compression in Stuffit\" ? ]

[morgan gangwere]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Igor Peshansky wrote:
> Ugh, top-posting...  Reformatted.
> 
> On Tue, 29 May 2007, Mike Marchywka wrote:
> 
>>> From: morgan gangwere <0.fractalus@XXXXX.XXX>
>>> Reply-To: The Cygwin-Talk Maiming List <cygwin-talk@XXXXXX.XXX>
>>> To: The Cygwin-Talk Maiming List <cygwin-talk@XXXXXX.XXX>
> 
> <http://cygwin.com/acronyms/#PCYMTNQREAIYR>.  Mindless chatter can feed
> the spammers too...
> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>[snip]
> 
> Hmm, I wonder what a Fourier transform for Cygwin packages would look
> like?  Perhaps "binary files get the lower frequencies, and READMEs, info
> pages, etc, get the higher ones"?  Then one could apply JPEG/MPEG
> compression as-is to really save space in the installation...  Plus, with
> all of the binary diff tools out there, even inter-frame compression is
> possible.
> 	Igor

i say we simply distribute a giant BMP or XPM file that has the ENTIRE
cygwin distro on *one* file and you put that bitmap onto your drive

*thats* how ya do it!

- --
Just a Thought
Morgan Gangwere

For those who want my PGP key:
http://pengunassasin.kicks-ass.org/pgpKey.html

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFGXOlPCF9T/dUsmAgRAjsnAJ9u/EQpjqVpWRfeVbZU7wJPr3HLyACfaHPw
V7CmUuhf/AKZ9GDeLxTlsN0=
=QMYz
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: SNR calculations (was Re: setup.exe missing from FTP site)

[Igor Peshansky]

On Tue, 29 May 2007, Warren Young wrote:

> Dave Korn wrote:
> >   Say, what is the square of a photon, anyway?
>
> One way to square photons is to make them pass through a sufficiently
> small square hole in an opaque plate.  The squared photons will undergo
> a diffraction distortion, so whether the resulting value is 1 or 0
> (photons visible or not) will depend on the angle between the hole and
> your observation apparatus.
>
> The basic technique has already been studied.  You can see a simulation
> of the results here:
>
> 	http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Square_diffraction.jpg

My notion of a square photon is a photon that would not fit into a
photon-sized round hole.  I don't believe there is a way to achieve that
via diffraction...
	Igor
-- 
				http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/
      |\      _,,,---,,_	    pechtcha@cs.nyu.edu | igor@watson.ibm.com
ZZZzz /,`.-'`'    -.  ;-;;,_		Igor Peshansky, Ph.D. (name changed!)
     |,4-  ) )-,_. ,\ (  `'-'		old name: Igor Pechtchanski
    '---''(_/--'  `-'\_) fL	a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-.  Meow!

Freedom is just another word for "nothing left to lose"...  -- Janis Joplin

Re: SNR calculations (was Re: setup.exe missing from FTP site)

[Corinna Vinschen]

On May 30 09:32, Igor Peshansky wrote:
> On Tue, 29 May 2007, Warren Young wrote:
> 
> > Dave Korn wrote:
> > >   Say, what is the square of a photon, anyway?
> >
> > One way to square photons is to make them pass through a sufficiently
> > small square hole in an opaque plate.  The squared photons will undergo
> > a diffraction distortion, so whether the resulting value is 1 or 0
> > (photons visible or not) will depend on the angle between the hole and
> > your observation apparatus.
> >
> > The basic technique has already been studied.  You can see a simulation
> > of the results here:
> >
> > 	http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Square_diffraction.jpg
> 
> My notion of a square photon is a photon that would not fit into a
> photon-sized round hole.  I don't believe there is a way to achieve that
> via diffraction...

What if the square photon isn't as powerful (lower frequency) as the
round photon for which the round photon hole has been designed in the
first place?  Is it too far-fetched to assume that in this case the
diagonal size is less than the diameter of the hole?

Just a hippothesis...


Corinna

Re: SNR calculations (was Re: setup.exe missing from FTP site)

[Igor Peshansky]

On Wed, 30 May 2007, Corinna Vinschen wrote:

> On May 30 09:32, Igor Peshansky wrote:
> > On Tue, 29 May 2007, Warren Young wrote:
> >
> > > Dave Korn wrote:
> > > >   Say, what is the square of a photon, anyway?
> > >
> > > One way to square photons is to make them pass through a sufficiently
> > > small square hole in an opaque plate.  The squared photons will undergo
> > > a diffraction distortion, so whether the resulting value is 1 or 0
> > > (photons visible or not) will depend on the angle between the hole and
> > > your observation apparatus.
> > >
> > > The basic technique has already been studied.  You can see a simulation
> > > of the results here:
> > >
> > > 	http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Square_diffraction.jpg
> >
> > My notion of a square photon is a photon that would not fit into a
> > photon-sized round hole.  I don't believe there is a way to achieve that
> > via diffraction...
>
> What if the square photon isn't as powerful (lower frequency) as the
> round photon for which the round photon hole has been designed in the
> first place?  Is it too far-fetched to assume that in this case the
> diagonal size is less than the diameter of the hole?
>
> Just a hippothesis...

Even if the diagonal size wasn't less than the diameter of the hole, my
son, when he was 1 year old, usually just used a hammer.

That, or assume that at the speed of light either the hole or the photon
will give...
	Igor
-- 
				http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/
      |\      _,,,---,,_	    pechtcha@cs.nyu.edu | igor@watson.ibm.com
ZZZzz /,`.-'`'    -.  ;-;;,_		Igor Peshansky, Ph.D. (name changed!)
     |,4-  ) )-,_. ,\ (  `'-'		old name: Igor Pechtchanski
    '---''(_/--'  `-'\_) fL	a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-.  Meow!

Freedom is just another word for "nothing left to lose"...  -- Janis Joplin

Re: SNR calculations (was Re: setup.exe missing from FTP site)

[Charles Wilson]

Igor Peshansky wrote:

> Even if the diagonal size wasn't less than the diameter of the hole, my
> son, when he was 1 year old, usually just used a hammer.
> 
> That, or assume that at the speed of light either the hole or the photon
> will give...

Nah, you guys are all wrong.  A square photon is one whose oscillations 
follow a square-wave pattern rather than sinusoidal.  Thus, by Fourier 
decomposition it can be shown that the square photon is actually 
composed of an infinite sequence of equal-or-higher-frequency "regular" 
sinusoidal ones.  So: a square photon actually has /higher/ energy 
content than a regular photon with the same fundamental frequency: in 
the limit, it has infinite energy.  Say, maybe we could harness one of 
these suckers to solve the world's greenhouse gas emission issues by 
eliminating dependence on hydrocarbons.  Boy, Big Oil won't like that 
idea -- HEY -- WHO ARE YOU GUYS -- LET ME GO -- WHAT ARE YOU DOI

Re: SNR calculations (was Re: setup.exe missing from FTP site)

[Igor Peshansky]

On Thu, 31 May 2007, Charles Wilson wrote:

> Igor Peshansky wrote:
>
> > Even if the diagonal size wasn't less than the diameter of the hole,
> > my son, when he was 1 year old, usually just used a hammer.
> >
> > That, or assume that at the speed of light either the hole or the
> > photon will give...
>
> Nah, you guys are all wrong.  A square photon is one whose oscillations
> follow a square-wave pattern rather than sinusoidal.  Thus, by Fourier
> decomposition it can be shown that the square photon is actually
> composed of an infinite sequence of equal-or-higher-frequency "regular"
> sinusoidal ones.  So: a square photon actually has /higher/ energy
> content than a regular photon with the same fundamental frequency: in
> the limit, it has infinite energy.  Say, maybe we could harness one of
> these suckers to solve the world's greenhouse gas emission issues by
> eliminating dependence on hydrocarbons.  Boy, Big Oil won't like that
> idea -- HEY -- WHO ARE YOU GUYS -- LET ME GO -- WHAT ARE YOU DOI

Well, you did manage, in the last desperate convulsion, to hit "Send". :-)
	Igor
P.S. Ouch.  I think a square photon just hit me on the side of the head...
-- 
				http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/
      |\      _,,,---,,_	    pechtcha@cs.nyu.edu | igor@watson.ibm.com
ZZZzz /,`.-'`'    -.  ;-;;,_		Igor Peshansky, Ph.D. (name changed!)
     |,4-  ) )-,_. ,\ (  `'-'		old name: Igor Pechtchanski
    '---''(_/--'  `-'\_) fL	a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-.  Meow!

Freedom is just another word for "nothing left to lose"...  -- Janis Joplin

RE: SNR calculations (was Re: setup.exe missing from FTP site)

[Dave Korn]

On 31 May 2007 15:14, Igor Peshansky wrote:

> On Thu, 31 May 2007, Charles Wilson wrote:
> 
>> Igor Peshansky wrote:
>> 
>>> Even if the diagonal size wasn't less than the diameter of the hole,
>>> my son, when he was 1 year old, usually just used a hammer.
>>> 
>>> That, or assume that at the speed of light either the hole or the
>>> photon will give...
>> 
>> Nah, you guys are all wrong.  A square photon is one whose oscillations
>> follow a square-wave pattern rather than sinusoidal.  Thus, by Fourier
>> decomposition it can be shown that the square photon is actually
>> composed of an infinite sequence of equal-or-higher-frequency "regular"
>> sinusoidal ones.  So: a square photon actually has /higher/ energy
>> content than a regular photon with the same fundamental frequency: in
>> the limit, it has infinite energy.  Say, maybe we could harness one of
>> these suckers to solve the world's greenhouse gas emission issues by
>> eliminating dependence on hydrocarbons.  Boy, Big Oil won't like that
>> idea -- HEY -- WHO ARE YOU GUYS -- LET ME GO -- WHAT ARE YOU DOI
> 
> Well, you did manage, in the last desperate convulsion, to hit "Send". :-)

  Yeah, but he was clearly in too much of a hurry to add the traditional
sign-off.

    cheers,
      DaveK
-- 
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....