*** pinc|mirror has joined the channel | 2009-12-13 14:03:04 |
*** pinc has left the channel | 2009-12-13 14:03:04 |
*** scott____ has joined the channel | 2009-12-13 14:32:23 |
*** Vader has joined the channel | 2009-12-13 14:55:13 |
*** Guest4716033 has left the channel | 2009-12-13 14:56:56 |
*** scott____ has left the channel | 2009-12-13 15:44:45 |
*** mike_____ has joined the channel | 2009-12-13 16:13:24 |
*** pinc|mirror has left the channel | 2009-12-13 17:16:28 |
*** pinc has joined the channel | 2009-12-13 18:17:17 |
*** pinc has left the channel | 2009-12-13 18:17:24 |
*** Shelwien has left the channel | 2009-12-13 18:28:38 |
*** pinc has joined the channel | 2009-12-13 22:08:36 |
*** Krugz has joined the channel | 2009-12-13 22:20:33 |
*** Shelwien has joined the channel | 2009-12-13 22:38:15 |
*** pinc has left the channel | 2009-12-13 22:47:33 |
*** mike_____ has left the channel | 2009-12-13 23:45:24 |
*** osman has joined the channel | 2009-12-14 00:15:03 |
<osman> | hello all | 2009-12-14 00:15:13 |
<Shelwien> | hi ;) | 2009-12-14 00:15:53 |
<osman> | how are you? | 2009-12-14 00:16:30 |
<Shelwien> | ok i guess ;) and you? ;) | 2009-12-14 00:17:17 |
<osman> | a bit tired and sleepy as usual ;) | 2009-12-14 00:18:23 |
| i'm trying to catch long-time delay of icq log :) | 2009-12-14 00:18:46 |
| it's too long | 2009-12-14 00:18:51 |
<Shelwien> | well, i posted an "archiver" recently | 2009-12-14 00:19:03 |
| !grep scan7 | 2009-12-14 00:19:06 |
<osman> | good :) | 2009-12-14 00:20:13 |
<Shelwien> | and it seems that there's not that much sense in ultra-fast LZ implementations, with that kind of i/o speed ;) | 2009-12-14 00:20:20 |
| (and its not like my implementation is slow - rar -m0 speed is similar too) | 2009-12-14 00:20:57 |
<osman> | if i could reduct some of my "to-do" list items, i'll jump in BIT again | 2009-12-14 00:20:59 |
<Shelwien> | how's you DNA btw? ;) | 2009-12-14 00:21:13 |
<osman> | i only find that even simple delta filter is enough | 2009-12-14 00:21:31 |
| but there is only several distinct values. | 2009-12-14 00:21:44 |
<Shelwien> | ? | 2009-12-14 00:21:57 |
<osman> | so, then why not to use markov chains for that? | 2009-12-14 00:22:00 |
| if you remember i was working on prediction part of which is based on "unwrapped phase linearity" | 2009-12-14 00:22:32 |
<Shelwien> | yes | 2009-12-14 00:22:39 |
<osman> | and at last time which have discussed about it, i was trying to use piece-wise linear regression for fitting this linearity | 2009-12-14 00:23:18 |
<Shelwien> | and? | 2009-12-14 00:23:39 |
<osman> | and you've offered linear predictor model for practical purpose | 2009-12-14 00:23:50 |
| as a first step to jump in linear predictor, i've tried delta filter | 2009-12-14 00:24:05 |
| and i got very limited distinct values. | 2009-12-14 00:24:24 |
| so, why not to use finite state machines for tracking them? | 2009-12-14 00:24:44 |
<Shelwien> | i don't really see how to use state machines to track linearity | 2009-12-14 00:25:13 |
<osman> | imagine, there are only 4 phase angle (usually of course) | 2009-12-14 00:25:44 |
<Shelwien> | limited set of delta values was kinda expected, knowing the nature of the data | 2009-12-14 00:25:47 |
| but you could scale it down a bit | 2009-12-14 00:26:13 |
<STalKer-X> | are all CM compressors symmetric? o,o | 2009-12-14 00:26:17 |
<Shelwien> | not necessarily, but most existing ones are | 2009-12-14 00:26:44 |
| people that write them are lazy ;) | 2009-12-14 00:26:58 |
<osman> | so, next phase angle can be known on consequence nucleotids by using a state machine | 2009-12-14 00:27:14 |
| btw, Stalker how are you? :) | 2009-12-14 00:27:32 |
<STalKer-X> | depressed :x | 2009-12-14 00:27:42 |
<osman> | and who are you? :) | 2009-12-14 00:27:43 |
<STalKer-X> | hmm :) | 2009-12-14 00:28:06 |
<Shelwien> | sure, but isn't it the same as directly predicting the next "letter"? | 2009-12-14 00:28:15 |
<osman> | of course | 2009-12-14 00:28:35 |
| if you remember, i was trying to use it as an extra context | 2009-12-14 00:28:48 |
<Shelwien> | well, i mentioned that its not easy to make use of that kind of correlations | 2009-12-14 00:28:56 |
<osman> | just think as SSE | 2009-12-14 00:29:02 |
<Shelwien> | yeah, i understand of course | 2009-12-14 00:29:11 |
<osman> | then i have to stick LZ as the others :P | 2009-12-14 00:29:21 |
<Shelwien> | not really | 2009-12-14 00:30:03 |
<osman> | anyway, we will see my progress on this. maybe it's totally useless | 2009-12-14 00:30:14 |
<Shelwien> | and anyway, one way of using it is like this | 2009-12-14 00:30:39 |
<osman> | there are a few things to do before working on it | 2009-12-14 00:30:49 |
<Shelwien> | you know that a long sequence of "symbols" are on the same line | 2009-12-14 00:31:07 |
| so you can store that information before encoding that sequence | 2009-12-14 00:31:47 |
| like line coefs and max "error" | 2009-12-14 00:32:19 |
| and that should allow to mask out the "symbols" | 2009-12-14 00:32:40 |
<osman> | yes, that's another optimization. but, it's only useful on human genome | 2009-12-14 00:32:50 |
<Shelwien> | which would break out from these limits | 2009-12-14 00:32:53 |
<osman> | it doesn't work on i.e. e.coli.txt | 2009-12-14 00:33:04 |
<Shelwien> | well, this approach seems more reasonable to me | 2009-12-14 00:33:32 |
| it won't have much effect, but still can provide some additional compression | 2009-12-14 00:33:59 |
| and as to SSE | 2009-12-14 00:34:09 |
<osman> | for e.coli, there is no too much long runs | 2009-12-14 00:34:15 |
<Shelwien> | well, you know, 1000 would be long enough ;) | 2009-12-14 00:34:36 |
| even 100 probably ;) | 2009-12-14 00:34:43 |
<osman> | as i said before, i'm trying to stick all things together to break some record | 2009-12-14 00:34:59 |
<Shelwien> | <Shelwien> and as to SSE | 2009-12-14 00:35:23 |
<osman> | i have to analyze it first for RLE ;) | 2009-12-14 00:35:32 |
<Shelwien> | i'd try to maintain some kind of average line coefs for recent data | 2009-12-14 00:36:07 |
| and maybe use angle or something in SSE context | 2009-12-14 00:36:27 |
| but imho that's unlikely to be of much use | 2009-12-14 00:36:50 |
| well, unless there're actually some correlations between line coefs and nucleotid probability distributions | 2009-12-14 00:37:45 |
<osman> | we'll see | 2009-12-14 00:39:31 |
| btw, i probably got a job about something like torrent+fma | 2009-12-14 00:39:52 |
<Shelwien> | %) | 2009-12-14 00:40:13 |
<osman> | it's from a local TV | 2009-12-14 00:40:14 |
<Shelwien> | if its for video, there's unlikely to be any use for fma | 2009-12-14 00:40:54 |
<osman> | it will be determined until weekend | 2009-12-14 00:41:02 |
| "something like torrent+fma" | 2009-12-14 00:41:21 |
| probably i'll add my "bit stream models" | 2009-12-14 00:41:45 |
| and maybe some simple data recovery for incase transmission error | 2009-12-14 00:42:16 |
<Shelwien> | can you be more specific? ;) | 2009-12-14 00:42:19 |
<osman> | also, resume support | 2009-12-14 00:42:24 |
<Shelwien> | like what is transferred? ;) | 2009-12-14 00:42:30 |
<osman> | time to time, a huge video file - something like 4-5 GiB | 2009-12-14 00:42:59 |
| from one office to the other | 2009-12-14 00:43:16 |
<Shelwien> | so, as i said, there's no need for fma or compression ;) | 2009-12-14 00:43:30 |
<osman> | i'll demand a set of sample data ;) | 2009-12-14 00:44:01 |
<Shelwien> | well, unless you're willing to write a video recompressor ;) | 2009-12-14 00:44:02 |
| well, i'd say the best idea should be to use a UDP-based protocol | 2009-12-14 00:45:26 |
<osman> | my business partner is trying to settle with them. so, i'll learn something later | 2009-12-14 00:45:32 |
| yes, i thought that too. | 2009-12-14 00:45:47 |
<Shelwien> | i mean, transfer the fragments in packets | 2009-12-14 00:45:59 |
<osman> | and again same idea ;) | 2009-12-14 00:46:09 |
<Shelwien> | and repeat passes with lost packets, until you collect whole file | 2009-12-14 00:46:18 |
<osman> | and again same ;) | 2009-12-14 00:46:32 |
<Shelwien> | otherwise, with tcp and large amounts of data you'd need some safety measures anyway | 2009-12-14 00:46:51 |
| and there'd be also tcp overhead | 2009-12-14 00:47:03 |
<osman> | i expect that they need some specific features, such as only selecting a office name in the list which has a dynamic IP. i plan to solve that via a web service which holds most updated IP list | 2009-12-14 00:47:57 |
<Shelwien> | in fact, i did implement a weird protocol line that once | 2009-12-14 00:48:24 |
| it was a icmp echo tunnel | 2009-12-14 00:48:31 |
| it was sending the data as a payload for ping packets | 2009-12-14 00:49:02 |
| with fake source ip | 2009-12-14 00:49:07 |
<osman> | there is no need to make something superb. if it can transfer files in a reasonable time. then it's done :) | 2009-12-14 00:49:10 |
<Shelwien> | so the targeted machine was "returning" the packets to someplace different from the real sender | 2009-12-14 00:49:35 |
| ...and it allowed to download stuff for free from a test account of some provider ;) | 2009-12-14 00:50:05 |
| that test account only allowed to access their site | 2009-12-14 00:50:23 |
| but with an external server i still could receive "broadcasts" from my server ;) | 2009-12-14 00:50:42 |
<osman> | :) nice | 2009-12-14 00:50:53 |
<Shelwien> | i mean, my server sent the "pings" to the provider's server | 2009-12-14 00:51:13 |
| and it "returned" them to me ;) | 2009-12-14 00:51:19 |
| well, i just remembered about it because there were similar requirements to your case | 2009-12-14 00:52:09 |
| so there was a protocol for batch requesting the missing frames after a pass etc | 2009-12-14 00:52:33 |
| btw, i'm lazy, so an additional side channel was used for backward transfer (to server) ;) | 2009-12-14 00:53:18 |
| i just replaced an image in the forum avatar on provider's site ;) | 2009-12-14 00:53:57 |
| and server occasionally checked it ;) | 2009-12-14 00:54:03 |
<osman> | i'll off now. i have to get up 06:30 %) | 2009-12-14 01:07:26 |
<Shelwien> | good luck then ;) | 2009-12-14 01:07:57 |
<osman> | thx | 2009-12-14 01:08:13 |
| cya | 2009-12-14 01:08:15 |
*** osman has left the channel | 2009-12-14 01:08:54 |
*** Shelwien has left the channel | 2009-12-14 01:13:59 |
*** Shelwien has joined the channel | 2009-12-14 01:15:23 |
*** Krugz|Study has left the channel | 2009-12-14 01:44:22 |
*** STalKer-Y has joined the channel | 2009-12-14 04:50:30 |
*** STalKer-X has left the channel | 2009-12-14 04:53:44 |
*** Krugz|Study has joined the channel | 2009-12-14 05:22:30 |
*** Krugz has left the channel | 2009-12-14 05:52:32 |
*** pinc has joined the channel | 2009-12-14 07:41:35 |
*** mike_____ has joined the channel | 2009-12-14 14:11:29 |
*** Krugz has joined the channel | 2009-12-14 15:18:37 |
*** pinc has left the channel | 2009-12-14 16:18:19 |
<STalKer-Y> | 7z changelog is always funny ;D | 2009-12-14 17:10:37 |
| "some bugs were fixed" :x | 2009-12-14 17:10:47 |
*** pinc has joined the channel | 2009-12-14 17:15:39 |
<Krugz> | lol should just put "it got better, probably" :P | 2009-12-14 17:16:05 |
*** STalKer-Y has left the channel | 2009-12-14 19:04:53 |
*** schnaader has joined the channel | 2009-12-14 19:15:50 |
*** schnaader has left the channel | 2009-12-14 19:20:57 |
*** pinc has left the channel | 2009-12-14 21:37:42 |
*** mike_____ has left the channel | 2009-12-14 23:44:59 |
*** Krugz has left the channel | 2009-12-15 00:06:49 |
*** Krugz has joined the channel | 2009-12-15 00:14:16 |
*** Shelwien has left the channel | 2009-12-15 01:15:11 |
*** Shelwien has joined the channel | 2009-12-15 01:51:16 |
*** STalKer-X has joined the channel | 2009-12-15 04:49:20 |
*** pinc has joined the channel | 2009-12-15 07:13:28 |
<Shelwien> | ... | 2009-12-15 08:24:41 |
| !next | 2009-12-15 08:24:44 |