Edward
Sep 22 2004, 09:23 AM
Store it on offline media. If your computer breaks you can transfer it more easily and you can use cheaper memory. Computer memory is active memory you could be able to have inactive memory but I don’t know what it would cost in a computer (probably the same as in a deck or offline memory).
Also I would say the price of the library includes the media on witch it is stored. Or do you have to pay for the cubic meter of books per rating point.
As an aside why is the storage space/rating linier for books but exponential for computer. I can concave of the rating 500 library that is lager on chip than it is in books.
As to the cost of memory. There are 3 types in SR. active memory, storage memory and offline storage. (as taken from the decking rules). I don’t have matrix available at the moment to quote the prices.
The description of personal computers suggests that the only memory that come with is non volatile active memory they use for both functions. It should be trivial to install a dedicated module of offline storage to act as an additional bank of storage memory. Computer BR 3 and 50+5*MP nuyen.
Of cause it seems very strange that a data display unit and a computer (which I assumed could act as a data display unit as well as its other functions) have exactly the same price.
For the viewing system the min would be a 100MP computer. For having pertinent pages available while doing a ritual (say your formula for a familiar) you would want a couple of display screens or a printer. If you have a rating 6 library you probably have a lifestyle that comes with a cyber terminal that includes all this already.
Techno geek mages with high lifestyles could go as far as wall screens, voice recognition and computers hanging from the ceiling so as not to interfere with the ritual cercal.
If you put the photovoltaic paint on the floor (like sprawl survival guide has for picture windows) could you store your ritual circles on computer to be called on whenever you want them at a moments notice?
If you have a data jack and an image link you could even slot your howl library and access it as a data soft.
Edward
GrinderTheTroll
Sep 22 2004, 05:28 PM
QUOTE (hobgoblin) |
the way i view sr chip storage is a kind of computer on a chip. think back to the days of 8 and 16 bit nintendo and sega machines. before the cd-rom became popular for games. those days anything shiped on chips and was slotted into the main box. |
I'd guess it uses something more like cutting-edge holographic storage technology. Opitical Memory Chip is probably more like a medium that's written to on multiple layers using a laser as opposed to the chips you are referring to that used ROM chips to hold programming and RAM chips was workspace.
OMC are simply described as "diskettes of the 21st century".
hobgoblin
Sep 22 2004, 07:29 PM
as you may notice in the post, i didnt have it fully tougth out before i started typeing so i think im contradicting the game cartridge image by the time i hit the end of the post. problem is that its how i write most my posts...
Kanada Ten
Sep 22 2004, 10:29 PM
QUOTE |
Jason Farlander Hey, K-10, could you please point out the relevant passages in the descriptions of shamanic and hermetic approaches to magic that imply that hermetics as a whole are more power-hungry than shamans? |
Did I imply such? If so it was not intentional.
Have you even had a flu or similar illness in which you felt weak, where lifting even the cup of water was a chore? I correlate Magic Loss to the same sensation, a loss of ability. And of course we can sight Geasa as a "cure," but is having such requirements worth the meager benefits of the datajack, namely portability and "high resolution" Matrix access? Obviously each magician will decide that for him or herself, but I doubt many will agree it is. I wouldn't even think half, but certainly not more than. Awakenings implys a culture in magical circles frowns upon Magic loss and certainly intentional loss, and the fear of burn out is a very real fear to Awakened people.
Jason Farlander
Sep 22 2004, 10:55 PM
Well the implication in your statements that I got was that the arguments for some reason did not apply to shamans - that hermetics, and primarily hermetics, were all very concerned with every minute loss of power.
Remember, a huge proportion of hermetics - those who do not persue lifestyles in the shadows, the military, or corp security - probably wont have terribly many spells higher than force 2 (since they would require permits to learn) or, for that matter, *any* spells higher than force 4 or 5 - its just not necessary. Furthermore, these people also wont generally intelligence and willpower attributes of 6 each - theyre just otherwise normal people who can weild magic.
So, what loss of power does a single magic point actually constitute for such a person? Absolutely none whatsoever. For them, the difference in magical ability before and after datajack implanting is entirely theoretical.
You seem to see magic loss as something that would be felt at all levels of magic use - that is is actually harder for someone with magic 5 to cast a force 1 entertainment spell than someone with magic 6, just not sufficiently harder to be represented in mechanical terms. With that view I can see why you find the very idea of getting a datajack abhorrent to most mages... but it is not a view that I share, nor is it one I for which I see any support in the descriptive text concerning magic loss.
Kanada Ten
Sep 22 2004, 11:05 PM
QUOTE |
You seem to see magic loss as something that would be felt at all levels of magic use - that is is actually harder for someone with magic 5 to cast a force 1 entertainment spell than someone with magic 6, just not sufficiently harder to be represented in mechanical terms. With that view I can see why you find the very idea of getting a datajack abhorrent to most mages... but it is not a view that I share, nor is it one I for which I see any support in the descriptive text concerning magic loss. |
Detection Spells have a radius determined Magic Rating, Focus Addiction is determined by Magic Rating, Ward size is linked Magic Rating, Masking, Sensing, so on and so on. I could go on finding minute issues about Magic Rating having an important impact on a regular magician's life. These no runner mages are pretty much what I'm talking about - they have almost no reason to want a datajack and slightly less than the average mundane person of whom around 50% have datajacks. The idea that most mages won't have spells over force 2 is nonsense as they will likely be registered and have permits to perform their jobs in research labs (at least force 4 or 5 to affect highly processed materials), special effects (requiring at least force 4 or 5 to be recorded), medical facilities and trauma wards (where even force 6 Heal and Treat are weak), and so on. The discussion has focused on hermetics because the issue arose from the original post and hermetic libraries.
Jason Farlander
Sep 22 2004, 11:56 PM
I sincerely doubt that focus addiction would be a major concern for a hermetic researcher or that the difference between a 20 meter radius detection spell and a 24 meter radius detection spell would be considered significant for most people. Anything beyond the most basic applications of masking are unlikely to matter to your average mage. The difference in warding ability betwen magic ratings 5 and 6 comes down to the magic 5 mage can ward a 5*5*10 meter room, while the magic 6 mage can ward a 5*6*10 meter room. Oh no! What a huge difference!
Additionally, I never said that the average mage wouldnt have any spells over force 2 - I said they wouldnt have terribly many. I agree that many job-related spells would be force 4 or 5 depending on what the job requires. However, non-combat applications of sorcery do not ever really demand a force higher than 5, except in the very specific case of medical facilities - where force 6, or even force 5, is far from weak (bringing someone from the brink of death to moderate injury in seconds without surgery isn't exactly trivial, and i doubt many trauma-room mages have a high enough sorcery to reliably generate more than 5 successes on the casting test anyway). But even assuming that no trauma-room mage would even consider getting a datajack, such people arent exactly a majority.
Yes, there are countless ways in which a drop from magic rating 6 to magic rating 5 has an effect on the things a mage can do, but only in specific and relatively rare cases would any of those differences in power actually be "important".
I will agree that, relatively speaking, fewer mages will take datajacks than will mundanes, but I wouldnt be surprised to see that, say 1/4-1/3 of all mages would possess one. This is attributable simply to the fact that there does exist an extra tradeoff, which would by itself convince some people to avoid getting one. All of you arguments about datajacks being insigificantly better than trode nets for most people should, however, apply to all of the mundies out there - and yet fully half of them possess one.
In the greater scheme of things, most people are willing to sacrifice quite a bit for convenience. You would think that most people would be pretty concerned with, oh I dont know, being healthy - but that doesnt stop them from choosing to eat fast food. Datajack-enabled devices are so ubiquitous in SR that its simply far more convenient to get one installed than to have to carry a trode-rig around with you and worry about aligning it properly every time you want to use such a device.
...But I'm done ranting now. I am sorry if I seemed overly antagonistic... such wasnt really my intent - I just like lengthy explanations. Anyway, by all means, proceed with the regularly scheduled topic.
Kanada Ten
Sep 22 2004, 11:59 PM
QUOTE |
I will agree that, relatively speaking, fewer mages will take datajacks than will mundanes, but I wouldnt be surprised to see that, say 1/4-1/3 of all mages would possess one. |
I can agree with those numbers.
QUOTE |
I am sorry if I seemed overly antagonistic... such wasnt really my intent - I just like lengthy explanations. Anyway, by all means, proceed with the regularly scheduled topic. |
Hey, we haven't even called eachother names yet!
TheScamp
Sep 23 2004, 01:38 AM
Enough courtesy! I want some intestines on the floor this instant!
Kagetenshi
Sep 23 2004, 02:43 AM
You… you net adanak!
~J
Edward
Sep 23 2004, 04:06 AM
If I was a SR magical I would not consider a data jack worth the loss of magic, come however would. As a shadow runner I would however consider a smart gun to be worth the loss and then the image link, 30MP headwear and data jack are free.
Magical medics want all the magic rating they can get for the big healing spells. Although they wouldn’t be used often as in most cases a force 2 healing followed up by extended hospital care would suffice.
Edward
GrinderTheTroll
Sep 23 2004, 05:39 PM
Can't you Geas the Magic point loss for cyberware? If so, then I'd imagine some mages would go that route for the extra benefit of Cyber/Bioware.
hobgoblin
Sep 23 2004, 09:51 PM
yes you can geas it but its like haveing a sprinter use a walking stick...
GrinderTheTroll
Sep 23 2004, 10:18 PM
QUOTE (hobgoblin) |
yes you can geas it but its like haveing a sprinter use a walking stick... |
Nah, it's the price people would probably pay if they really wanted a datajack and all that. One Geas isn't horrible if the benefit of losing the point was genuine. As far as SR goes, they really aren't any less powerful just restricted a bit.
Kanada Ten
Sep 23 2004, 10:20 PM
Right, but you have to really want a datajack and all that. Why? What's the point of a datajack that's worth having a restriction on your source of power?
Botch
Sep 26 2004, 11:39 AM
I was reading two sourcebooks last night. Lone Star and Shadowbeat. Two things struck me, in Lone Star it states at the start that the data provided by the reporter/cop duo is "a few megabytes" and in Shadowbeat it also clearly states that simsense can be recorded on CD.
The bit about simsense on is not fluff, so...what would be the minimum effective length of a simsense recording at baseline standard?
hobgoblin
Sep 26 2004, 02:06 PM
look for info in SR3, under the simrig implant. the numbers are 1mp pr sec baseline and 3mp pr sec full-x recording. and i belive this is for one view only so if your going for a polyview recordeing, increase it by the number of recordings.
Edward
Sep 26 2004, 04:16 PM
QUOTE (hobgoblin) |
look for info in SR3, under the simrig implant. the numbers are 1mp pr sec baseline and 3mp pr sec full-x recording. and i belive this is for one view only so if your going for a polyview recordeing, increase it by the number of recordings. |
Those numbers are for the wet record. When you by a sim feature it has undergone significant cleaning up (listed in a book, SSG I think) and I would assume compression.
There dose seem to be a major inconsistency in the data transfer speeds and storage memory cost.
When in history have you been able to copy the largest block of removable storage available (1000MP if a reference I saw hear is to be believed) in 3 seconds (based on data transfer rates threw a data jack from MM)
Edward
hobgoblin
Sep 26 2004, 08:43 PM
when the system becomes fully optical
but yes, the file sizes for recording of video, audio, simsense and whatsnot fluxuate wildly. i think most of the numbers are tuned for game balance over consistency...
Botch
Sep 27 2004, 05:19 PM
So if you assume the shortest useful length of simsense would be a taster clip of baseline at 10 seconds, is the following true?
10 seconds of baseline = 1MP/sec = 10MP
Capacity of CD = 700MB
Therefore, 1MP = 70MB?
If that's true, then I think my deckers gonna find a DVD recorder.
hobgoblin
Sep 27 2004, 06:06 PM
sorry i lost the track when you made the jump from megapulse to megabyte...
Kagetenshi
Sep 27 2004, 08:43 PM
QUOTE (Botch) |
So if you assume the shortest useful length of simsense would be a taster clip of baseline at 10 seconds, is the following true?
10 seconds of baseline = 1MP/sec = 10MP Capacity of CD = 700MB
Therefore, 1MP = 70MB?
If that's true, then I think my deckers gonna find a DVD recorder. |
That is in no way, shape, or form true. Care to share how you got that?
~J
Edward
Sep 28 2004, 05:05 AM
Wile you did use the best numbers available it is still highly inaccurate.
1MP/sec is for a wet record before post production cleaning up and high grade compression
secondly I assumed that the capacity of CDs had increased greatly by 2050 and more so by 2060. The game designers simply failed to predict that we would change the name to DVD and probably go threw 5-10 other names between now and then. It wouldn’t surprise me to find terabyte storage in a package that looks like a CD.
Edward
Jason Farlander
Sep 28 2004, 05:22 AM
QUOTE (Kagetenshi) |
That is in no way, shape, or form true. Care to share how you got that?
~J |
Here is what i think happened.
First, it goes with the assumption that optical storage capacities have not changed in 60 years, and, furthermore, that dvd-style data storage lost in the long run to cd-style data storage methods.
Then, it seems that he somehow decided you can fit exactly 10 seconds of baseline simsense on an SR-era CD. This might actually have come from a sourcebook, I dont know.
Finally, since SR-era cds have the same storage capacity as current CD-R/RW's, and you can fit 10 seconds of baseline simsense on a CD, and 10 seconds of baseline simsense = 10MP, that means 10MP=700MB, or, 1MP=70MB.
All you have to do to throw that out the window is say that cds in the 2060s store quite a bit more information than pre-matrix ones, and then leave the difference conveniently undefined.
Botch
Sep 28 2004, 04:39 PM
Ok,
I looking through the Shadowbeat sourcebook when I came to the section on recording simsense. I am not at my flat and cannot give the actual page references. In the descriptions for recordable media that can be used to record baseline simsense it clearly states that simsense can be recorded onto CD.
A few points.
CDs have an industry standard contruction, they will not under any circumstances magically become bigger in 206x. A compact shiny diskette may exist, it just wouldn't be called a CD. A DVD is inherently a big CD, it isn't called CD2, CD4.7, or somesuch it is a DVD. FYI - Phillips have developed a new chemical optical disc that has a 4.7GB storage capacity and is the size of the end of a thumb, it isn't called CD2 or DVD2 either. As for as I am aware Shadowbeat contains the only references to CDs, in passing yes, but in the canon text, not fluff. As an historical note, commercial CDs have NEVER cost more to produce than a vinyl record.
Compression - no matter how good the compression system is, there is a physical limitation on how much data can be stored within an object. For a standard CD this is approximately 5,600,000,000 bits. That is the physical limit and it is a small quantity, although you can argue that we only use one side of a CD that would only double capacity and leads to the question of where does the label go? We are all conversant with canon interpretation in regards explicit/implicit statements. There is no mention of pre-recording, editing and high compression needed to specifically utilise CD as a simsense storage medium and CD is included in the same list as OMCs, therefore Edward's interpretation is "house". So, when the rules state 1MP/sec for a baseline simsense recording it is 1MP/sec regardless of storage medium.
Duration - Why did I pick 10 seconds? Firstly, no MP capacity for a CD is stated, only its ability to be effectively used as a storage medium. Secondly, considering the relative cost of OMCs in 206x a CD must have a smaller capacity, but just how much smaller? The keywords are effective usage, what in your opinion would be the shortest useful duration of a baseline simsense recording? Looking at the internet today, the shortest effective video clips are about 8-45 seconds in duration. To try and keep the MP-MB ratio at its most generous and the maths simple I made the assumption that the shortest useful duration of a baseline simsense recording would be 10 seconds.
So...
The standard capacity of CDs = 700MB
The memory requirements of baseline simsense = 1MP/sec
The shortest useful length of a simsense clip = 10 secs
Therefore...
700MB/10 seconds = 70MB/sec = 1MP/sec
Jason Farlander
Sep 28 2004, 05:05 PM
Whatever, man. I dont have shadowbeat, so if you could provide the relevant quote I can comment further. Until then, since you admit that you made up the 10 second bit, I dont see that you actually have a point. However, since I enjoy giving lengthier explanations for things, I will go on.
Even without knowing the exact quote, I find it far more likely that when they mentioned the use of CDs they meant "discs that resemble CDs to give you a visual idea" than "700MB CDs" I mean, DVD as a format DIDNT EXIST when the published the book - Shadowbeat was published in 1992, and DVD-Video wasn't released until 1996 in Japan, and didn't make it to the US until 1997. So... its not like they looked at the wealth of available disc formats and chose 700MB CDs... CDs were simply the most advanced-seeming common medium at the time. Shadowrun is full of these sorts of issues, because predicting the future is a difficult thing to do.
Anyway, what *is* abundantly clear is that "pulses" and "megapulses" were designed as an arbitrary unit of computer storage for the purpose of avoiding any real-world comparisons and simplifying the game. If you really want to believe your calculation, go for it. But realize that you wont be convincing many people here that
Botch
Sep 28 2004, 05:37 PM
Oh, I know the argument is weak and nobody really wants to convert MP to MB, its just that I find the cost of memory in SR INCREDIBLY, INCREDIBLY, INCREDIBLY STUPID AND BROKEN.
I would have thought that by version 3 of the rule system somebody might have adjusted the costs properly or had the guts to produce an offical erata to all BBBv3 that said, in effect, "slash the memory costs". People winge about bits and pieces of SR rules being "broken", skills/magic/matrix/rigging all got an overhaul over the years, but nobody did anything about an item that underpins all recording/storage technology. In usefulness memory in 206x costs more than it did 70 years ago (in SR history). Just how did the corps pull the wool over the eyes of the entire world to get that one past
If you have a problem with 10 seconds, what you going to do? You want more than 10 seconds on a CD, then MPs are even smaller. Less than 10 seconds? Want a 1 second duration, that leaves 1MP=700MB. CDs changed capacity? Where in canon did it say that?
The old chestnut of an arguement that says "All data in shadowrun comes with it own attached software". How the did that one come about? Its absolute bollocks on so many levels it needs a rant of its own.
ps. Sorry about the hijack. I will be able to provide the quote when either I can remember to pack my book for work or the telephone company sort out my broadband connection at home.
Kagetenshi
Sep 28 2004, 05:42 PM
If Phillips still exists in SR, you're right.
Otherwise, a CD is whatever someone says it is.
~J
Herald of Verjigorm
Sep 28 2004, 05:43 PM
Am I the only one here who remembers that CDs weren't always 700MB? Although 60MB of difference is relatively little compared to the differences being assumed for the "1MP=unknown but a whole lot more than 70MB," there's a lot of time for adjustments in the technology to occur. It also proves that CD is not a specific manufacturing process such that no changes can ever occur and still use the same name. It is not irrational to suspect that at some time in the future, consumers will grow sick of 90 different proprietary data storage methods and will demand that all technologies of that time be integrated into one format that will be significantly superior to each of the competing methods. Or, the corps will trade or steal whatever manufacturing technology they don't have and eventually will all be producing such composite tech CDs.
Kagetenshi
Sep 28 2004, 05:48 PM
I remember 640MB CDs. However, Philips does keep a fairly tight leash on the definition of a CD, so unless they reverse that or die they won't grow too much.
On the other hand, how long would they retain legal ownership of that definition?
~J
GrinderTheTroll
Sep 28 2004, 05:56 PM
New optical format in Japan has produced a whopping 1 Terrabyte storage capacity using a CD sized disc. MP was designed to be a generic measurement of size, attempting to convert Megapulses to Megabytes is silly. Furthermore, the name "Mega-pulse" implies dataflow rather than a fixed quantity of digital storage as does "Mega-byte".
Personally, I've never cared much about the conversion from MP to MB. Although I don't wholly agree on the amoung of "MP" it takes to store images or video considering what is capable by today's methods, I can agree on their idea to keep these concepts vauge.
Botch
Sep 28 2004, 06:10 PM
QUOTE (Herald of Verjigorm) |
Am I the only one here who remembers that CDs weren't always 700MB? |
Actually, they always had the capability to be 700MB, just that it was a little bit more expensivefidly to produce and the recording industries wanted to keep an ace up their sleeve. Just how do you copy a 700MB disc when you can only buy 640MB recordable media. Commercially available audio CDs can have upto 84 minutes of storage, at which point CDs are at their pinacle of development. So, no it doesn't prove that CDs have evolved into a new standard, in fact the only major development to occur with CDs is the dye used to allow faster recording/re-recording. FYI - I have been building "best bang per buck" computers systems since 1985 and have seen many great ideas and systems crushed beneath the heel of that devil incarnate. I remember the days when the free software that came with a magazine had to be typed in, rather than use the coverdisc.
Considering the plethora of acronyms, names and standards in the current IT sector for intrinsically the same products I cannot understand how you can justify the concept that CDs in SR have anything other than their current capacity; unless you feel that CDs are in the same league as hoovers, biros, and burgers.
Laserdisc, Crystaldisc, WORM, CD, DVD, same tech, different size/capacity, different names.
Kagetenshi
Sep 28 2004, 07:49 PM
Botch, we’re talking CDs, not CD-Rs or CD-RWs. I have a copy of Battle Chess on a 640MB CD.
Also, as I said before, this is entirely dependent on Philips.
~J
hobgoblin
Sep 28 2004, 08:09 PM
discussions like these is why its best to look at SR like its a paralell universe that split of at around 1990 or so...
but we got a slashing of concealability for mobile devices so maybe we will get it on memory cost to?
hyzmarca
Sep 28 2004, 08:58 PM
QUOTE (Kagetenshi @ Sep 28 2004, 12:48 PM) |
I remember 640MB CDs. However, Philips does keep a fairly tight leash on the definition of a CD, so unless they reverse that or die they won't grow too much.
On the other hand, how long would they retain legal ownership of that definition?
~J |
Patents last for 20 years from the date of filing. Philips' patent on CDs will have run out before the Awakneing
hobgoblin
Sep 28 2004, 10:09 PM
infact its about to run out as we speak...
Kagetenshi
Sep 28 2004, 10:29 PM
Once that happens, it's open season on what CD means.
~J
Edward
Sep 29 2004, 05:59 AM
SR3 p301. simrig: a simrig is an implant that makes WET simsense recordings.
Emphasis mine.
And in the sprawl survival guide it talks about postproduction technics.
As I understand the movie industry every digital media type ever has had postproduction compressing the data in some way (even if it was only reducing image resolution). Do you have a reference for something other than the wet record?
How do you get a physical limit on the amount of compressed data a CD can hold? There is a hard limit on the number of bits you can store but if I want to store a 50-gig bitmap of solid blue (all one shade) any competent compression utility will bring it down to a few K. compression efficiency has nothing to do with the media you store the data on, only the complexity of your raw data and the quality of your encryptions program.
CD may be an industry standard but recall that there has already been one expansion while retaining the name CD (70-80 min I think). There was really nothing stoping them calling DVD CD2. It was the same size and the readers where backward compatible. SR effectively assumed that the name would stay and started using the term CD before the advent of DVDs. It would be highly improbable that the item referred to as a CD in SR don’t have much more capacity than a modern DVD.
As a final point, who would use a 10MP removable media system when for a lower price per MP you can have any capacity up to 1000MP and a cheaper r/w device?
I do concure that the price of media is unreasonably high. Compare ~$5 for a DVD RW that can hold 90 min of the best quality flat vid you can get to a opticam listing 1MP/min making offline storage 90 MP = 455 nuyen for the offline storage especially strange seeing as you can by a video playback unit for 400 and a video chip for 20
Edward
Da9iel
Sep 29 2004, 06:05 AM
The vehicles section mentions 1MP/min for video and 1MP/min for audio, but you can digitally zoom 20x before losing quality, so 90 MP on a DVD probably isn't too unfair.
Edward
Sep 29 2004, 11:31 AM
True removing resolution that is not displayable without zoom is something post production would probably do.
But this is where it breaks down for me.
Even if you accept the MP as an arbitrary measure of storage space (which I easily do) how can you justify 1 min video with 20* zoom capability taking up the same amount of storage space as 1 min of audio.
The technology exited when the game was originally released to record a 90 min interview on a couple of dollars worth of reusable media (caset tapes remember those) in SR the media to record a 90 min interview would cost 455nuyen. The quality may be better bus pleas 10000% increase in cost over 70 years.
Edward
Botch
Sep 29 2004, 01:41 PM
Shadowbeat p.98
Regardless of the physical media used for storage, the amount of storage required for various forms of information is always the same. It does not matter if a user has a CD, an OMC, or his own lovingly implanted dome-chrome. It's a digital world, chummer, and a megapulse is a megapulse.
Hi-Res Video imaging = 1Mp/minute
Normal spectrum sound = 1Mp/minute
Extended spectrum sound = 3Mp/minute
Wet record baseline simsense = 1Mp/second
Dir-X Format baseline simsense = 1Mp/second (theatres)
ACT-format simsense = SimsenseMp/100 (personal systems)
the standard OMC ... Commercial configurations are available in increments of Mp up to 100Mp, then in increments of 100Mp up to the gigapulse level (1,000Gp). ...
and I really should have read this bit on SR CDs...Six centimeters in diameter, a standard high-density/double sided digital compact disk can hold 500Mp of stored data. ...
SoCurrently it is not unfair or unreasonable to take MP3 file size to be 1MB/minute. This is makes the effective storage capability of a SR CD to be around the 600MB capacity with current compression systems. If the technology is better in 206x, the capacity per
of SR storage sucks big time. In fact it sucks so badly I cannot imagine how OMCs ever got into the marketplace. OK, OMCs are fast, but who would buy 1 TerraByte of off-line storage for $500,000? It is time to bite the bullet and say that low-res video, normal spectrum audio, and electronic books have no storage requirements beyond a basic 10-20
OMC.
In regards to the hermetic library, if the base library can be used in a hardcopy format then there is no justification for the cost of storage required to port it to electronic media. Remember the original is 2D, non-magical text with simple graphical images that can only be accessed at a few hundred words per minute.
Kagetenshi
Sep 29 2004, 02:16 PM
There is absolutely no way that a minute of audio having the same size as a minute of video is compressed in any way, shape, or form. We can only assume that the quality and range of recording is insane, and can be manipulated later much the same way the video can. MP3s are not germane to this discussion in the least.
~J
Botch
Sep 29 2004, 02:40 PM
QUOTE |
We can only assume that the quality and range of recording is insane, and can be manipulated later much the same way the video can. MP3s are not germane to this discussion in the least. |
Quality, yes that has an impact on file size, but at what point does recordable quality exceed the ability for the meta-human distinguish the quality difference? At a suprising low level, is the correct answer.
Range, no that has nothing to do with this. It clearly states NORMAL SPECTRUM frequencies, that would probably be 12Hz to 30kHz. Although the standard definition is 20-20,000Hz, it is not uncommon for a person's range to extend slightly beyond the 20-20k range.
MP3s are germane, as a current digitally recorded audio format, it is the system that is being replaced by 206x. If you wish to ignore MP3s as a valid comparison, this leaves SR CDs with a capacity of a current DVD.
500MP CD(SR)=500minutes of uncompressed audio at 1MP/minute
700MB CD(RL)=74minutes of uncompressed audio
700/74=9.45945945945946MB/min
500minutes*9.45945945945946MB/min=4,729.72MB = 4.7GB
Spooky result that bit of maths, no?
Herald of Verjigorm
Sep 29 2004, 05:31 PM
Try the math for a 512 point surround sound audio file. More immersive than any audio currently available for comparison. Is it likely? Not with current trends. Is it feasable? To an extent, it's feasable now, just the market will not accept such an expense of storage mediums with little or no gain for most users. Is it just a random attempt at justifying the numbers that I never bothered with anyway? Yes.
Edward
Sep 29 2004, 10:48 PM
The quality that CDs record at is generally accepted to be better than what the average human can differentiate.
This is why my monitor runes at high colour and not true colour.. I cant tell the difference. (especially when I am this tired and can barley see).
Is there any reference for the space required to store formatted text (the SR equivalent of .doc or .pdf). if thay give unformatted text somewhere you can work out the MB/MP as unformatted text always uses one bite per character and always will as long as we use binary computers (and the otaku fluff says they do).
Edward
Kagetenshi
Sep 30 2004, 02:16 AM
QUOTE (Edward) |
This is why my monitor runes at high colour and not true colour.. I cant tell the difference. (especially when I am this tired and can barley see). |
This is exactly the thing. You may not be able to tell, but the data is sampled beyond the range anyway to allow further analysis. *Points back to the 20x digital zoom capability*
And regarding characters always taking up one byte, you're wrong. Dead wrong, in fact. Check out Unicode and other systems meant to address more than 256 characters.
~J
Botch
Sep 30 2004, 09:49 AM
*Points to digital cameras and their 10X zoom capability, using MB storage*
QUOTE |
This is exactly the thing. You may not be able to tell, but the data is sampled beyond the range anyway to allow further analysis. *Points back to the 20x digital zoom capability |
The size of a image file can be thought of as dependant on a the 3D grid of picture elements or pixels. Each "Connect 4" grid is made of the pattern of pixels for each colour. So grid 0, for colour 0, upto grid 16,000 for 16-bit (high) colour and 16.8 million for 32-bit (true) colour. The size of each grid is determined by the level of resolution required. The design of this website is a resolution of 1024x768 pixels.
The human eye is unable to distinguish 16.8 million separate colours so there is no need increase the depth of the video images. It is only the resolution that will increase file size.
Da9iel
Sep 30 2004, 09:55 AM
Times--what is it--32 frames per second? Still a lot more memory hungry than even very fine audio. No?
Botch
Sep 30 2004, 11:18 AM
QUOTE (Herald of Verjigorm @ Sep 29 2004, 06:31 PM) |
Try the math for a 512 point surround sound audio file. More immersive than any audio currently available for comparison. Is it likely? Not with current trends. Is it feasable? To an extent, it's feasable now, just the market will not accept such an expense of storage mediums with little or no gain for most users. Is it just a random attempt at justifying the numbers that I never bothered with anyway? Yes. |
When I first read this I thought to said 5.1 surround sound, but on second read you seem to have said 512 point surround sound.
How can you justify that? 512 speakers encircling the room, that is common in 206x? How would a dictaphone/button mike/drone/cyberears capture sound from 512 different sources? Just how many sound sources does a SPU need to generate/interpolate 3D sound? The answer is NOT A LOT.
There is an valid argument that the frame speed could be very high on video, but that only widens the gap between audio and video and digitised hardcopy. Coupled with the exceptionally high cost of memory why would the generic video system have a fps rate higher than the meta-human eye can cope with? CCTV and FX cameras might benefit from a very high frame rate to produce hi-res slow-mo, but that is a specialised section of the video market.
Don't get me wrong I think the values for streams relating to simsense recording are more fair, it's just that video and audio streams do not, will not, cannot take up that level of memory cost.
Botch
Sep 30 2004, 05:12 PM
Pentax currently produce a digital camera with a 10xdigital zoom. It is also capable of recording MPEG-4 at 30fps. It comes with only a 64MB card as standard. The manufacturer's spec if available
here.For static images the memory requirements are.
64MB memory = 241frames@640x480 pixels = 29frames@2048x1536
This gives a memory multiplers of:
8.31 for 10x digital zoom
2.21 for 2.5x digital zoom
4.82 for 6.25x digital zoom
If you do the math a 20x digital zoom based therorectical requirements modified by how current pentax digital camera techology works the answer is
16.7 x MB requirement for 20x digital zoom.
so...
The camera can capture video at 30fps and requires 25.6MB/minute to record MPEG-4, add in the memory multiplier for 20x digital zoom at the memory requirement is 428.44MB/minute at TV resolution.
For the earlier post it can be seen that uncompressed sound requires 9.46MB/minute compared to 428.44MB/minute for MPEG-4 compressed video. We have not yet brought the video stream upto a resolution that fills a meta-human's visual field without pixelation and already video requires 45 times as much memory as stereo audio that is of a better quality than a meta-humans ear can distinguish. The memory requirement for DVD 20xzoom using pentax's current compression technology is 946.87MB/minute, 97xgreater than the uncompressed CD quality audio stream.
For the memory requirements to be the same for normal frequency audio as 20x digital zoom 2D video, something is seriously wrong. If I take, as has been suggested, that the SR sound files contain individual tracks that can be played/interigated seperately I would have use at least three 32-track samplers at a base price of 67,200
, figure in that really audio would also be compressed and the ratio is 1:900 using current compression systems.
That's right, 1 minute of 20x digital zoom, DVD quality 2D video requires the same memory storage as 900 minutes of 3D surround sound normal frequency audio.
Simsense, well, I've always imagined that would include, sight, hearing, touch, smell, taste, and hormone/gladular secretion effects. Staying with baseline (how do you quanitify emotion), that is 9000 extra elements for taste, approx 1000 elements for smell, and increasing video resolution to a pixel count of 130 million pixels, the maximum resolution of a meta-human eye without IR. Without adding in nerve impulse to re-create touch/pain we have a memory comsumption of approx 8,800MB/minute no-zoom and 181,000MB/minute for 20x visual zoom.
So in final, using CD quality as a base at of 9.46MB/minute, rounded to 1 decimal and assuming that it equals 1MP.
Normal spectrum audio = 9.5MB/minute = 1MP
DVD quality video with 20x digital zoom = 950MB/minute
Baseline Simsense without touch, no zoom = 8,800MB/minute
Baseline Simsense without touch, 20x zoom = 181,000MB/minute
Smoothing of the edges for game comparisons
Normal spectrum audio = 1MP/minute
Hi-Res Video, 20xzoom = 1,000MP/minute
Baseline without touch, no zoom = >9,000MP/minute
Baseline without touch, plus zoom = >180,000MP/minute
Can you see the problems with memory in SR yet?