Lowyat.NET: Latest topics by rroflyc

Prima Noodles

rroflyc — Sat, 08 Jun 2013 20:44:20 +0800

hai /k/,
that day i went supermarket buy stuff. then saw this Prima Noodle, 4 packs for 40+ rm. Supposed best noodle in the world, anyone try before? worth it?

[WTS] Sony Xperia P

rroflyc — Sat, 01 Jun 2013 00:55:29 +0800

Item(s):
Sony Xperia P LT22i (upgraded to JellyBean).
Package includes:
Full AP retail package (EP800 GreenHeart charger with EC450 mini-USB cable, MH750 Handsfree set unopened, documentation, box etc.).
Price:
RM600 +-
Warranty:
AP, running from 31st May 2013.
Dealing method:
COD please.
Location of seller:
Kuching.
Contact method/details:
PM
Age of item:
Bought 31/5/2013.
---

Item(s) conditions:
Mint.
Picture:

Reason for sale:
Venture into Android unsuccessful, going back iOS.

Would you...

rroflyc — Wed, 08 May 2013 00:28:40 +0800

Hai /k/,
Let's say one day you sit at kedai kopi. Then table beside you got this unker. He seems quite ok, quite in touch with trend. He can talk about gangnam style, facebook ke, apa sajalah. Can even make iPhone jokes.
You find out he's just a government servant, just cari makan like the rest of us. His face look like this:

How?

A manifesto

rroflyc — Wed, 08 May 2013 00:10:46 +0800

1. The nationalization of commercial natural resources, such as oil and timber. These would be put under the purview of the relevant ministry.
- These resources would be made available to the general public at a nominal sum. Market prices apply for private corporations.
-Existing personnel would be reviewed and the necessary retained. Gradual overhaul of management and constant review to ensure efficiency. Salary scales would be reviewed according to overall performance. Target would be to revise personnel ranges to a loose quota of 30% special natives, 40% natives and 30% others/60% natives, 40% others depending on demographics.
- Nominal compensation for previous owners assuming they have nationality. For foreign owned corporations, grace period would be given to wrap up operations and compensation would be negotiated. The compensation would NOT be according to market value and should be considered a sympathy compensation, as these resources by right belong to the country and NOT private corporations. What belongs to the people should not be used for the sole purpose of enriching a select few.
-Any profits from these ventures would belong to the nation and be employed to enhance the welfare of citizens and national economy.

2. Nationalization of essential services, including electricity and water. These would be run at a non-profit basis, and fees for services would be nominal. Everyone has a right to these basics at affordable prices.

3. Localization of urban based essential services, such as municipal works and security. Mayors for example would be elected by residents, as would police superintendent. General policy concerning public welfare to be set by relevant Ministry, such as force discipline.

To be continued...

Do discuss on the pros and cons, or add in as you see fit for discussion.

TPP

rroflyc — Tue, 30 Apr 2013 21:01:06 +0800

The United States and ten governments from around the Pacific are meeting yet again to hash out the secret Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement (TPP) on May 15-24 in Lima, Peru. The TPP is one of the worst global threats to the Internet since ACTA. Since the negotiations have been secretive from the beginning, we mainly know what's in the current version of this trade agreement because of a leaked draft [PDF] from February 2011. Based upon that text, some other leaked notes, and the undemocratic nature of the entire process, we have every reason to be alarmed about the copyright enforcement provisions contained in this multinational trade deal.

The TPP is likely to export some of the worst features of U.S. copyright law to Pacific Rim countries: a broad ban on breaking digital locks on devices and creative works (even for legal purposes), a minimum copyright term of the lifetime of the creator plus seventy years (the current international norm is the lifetime plus fifty years), privatization of enforcement for copyright infringement, ruinous statutory damages with no proof of actual harm, and government seizures of computers and equipment involved in alleged infringement. Moreover, the TPP is worst than U.S. copyright rules: it does not export the many balances and exceptions that favor the public interest and act as safety valves in limiting rightsholders’ protection. Adding insult to injury, the TPP's temporary copies provision will likely create chilling effects on how people and companies behave online and their basic ability to use and create on the Web.

The stated goal of the TPP is to unite the Pacific Rim countries by harmonizing tariffs and trade rules between them, but in reality, it's much more than that. The "intellectual property" chapter in this massive trade agreement will likely force changes to copyright and patent rules in each of the signatory countries. Accepting these new rules will not just re-write national laws, but will also restrict the possibility for countries to introduce more balanced copyright laws in the future. This strategy may end up harming other countries' more proportionate laws such as Chile, where a judicial order is required for ISPs to be held liable for copyright infringement and take down content. Such systems better protect users and intermediaries from disproportionate or censorship-driven takedowns. If the final TPP text forces countries to adopt a privatize notice and takedown regime, this could imply the end of the Chilean system. It would also undermine canada's notice-notice regime.

The content industry can and will continue to buy and lie to get their way to get laws that protects their interests, and what they want more than anything is for us to remain passively ignorant. They did it with SOPA, ACTA, and now it's TPP [ESP]. It's going to be a challenge to defeat these policies, but we can do it. The TPP is slated for conclusion this October, but our goal is to get the worst of these copyright provisions out of it. The way to fight back is to show that we will not put up with this: to demand an open transparent process that allows everyone, including experts from civil society members, to analyze, question, and probe any initiatives to regulate the Internet. The secrecy must be stopped once and for all.

Take action!

MALAYSIA is one of the signatory countries involved, so don't think this doesn't involve you. Go here for a petition:
http://gizmodo.com/tpp-the-biggest-global-...ce-ac-485634819

Distortion in song at high frequency.

rroflyc — Wed, 19 Dec 2012 22:10:29 +0800

Hi everyone, I have some questions for you experienced audiophiles if you have the time of day to oblige.
I was listening to Alt-J's (∆) "Something Good" on my iPhone recently through a pair of Sony XBA-1's. At the 1.22+ minute point, the audio on the Right channel had a strange distortion. Something like guitar distortion of a high frequency. Or a radio station being out of tune. This only occurred on the Right channel, for this specific song. I haven't been able to replicate it otherwise.
Trying the same song through my laptop using another pair of IEM's, there was no distortion at that point. The "noise" had been replaced by only a faint series of clicks in uneven intervals. It's as if this 2nd pair of IEM's filtered out the distortion completely.

What I'm curious with is, which one of these is the "reference" for the song? Is the "distortion" on the XBA-1 a true replication of the audio as intended or a fault? Or does the 2nd pair of IEM's fail to replicate the higher frequency noise on the song and could only managed a clipped sound?

Sample included for comparison. "Noise" most obvious at bridges before Chorus.
[youtube]Qjc26LcGAro[/youtube]