Nobody shares knowledge better than this



  •  @SpectateSwamp said:

    You have to get outside more. Wet leaves don't blow around and dry leaves don't bend and twist about.

    Yes they do. Hell, airplanes even bend and twist about in the wind, and people design them to best minimize that.

    @SpectateSwamp said:


    Sure was hoping against hope that somebody here in lazy forum would get the jump and post the reshoot themselves. Don't be afraid of the criticism. I'll be here to praise you double.

    I can't believe you have the nerve to say we're lazy when you're asking us to reshoot your own video.



  • Sichuan Earthquake video exposed

    @RHuckster said:

    I can't believe you have the nerve to say we're lazy when you're asking us to reshoot your own video.

    The Sichuan 2008 video needs reshooting. Nobody can do it as easily as ol Swampie. Just set SSDS to play back the 8 sections of interest from the first screen reshoot at 1/7 speed. Video that playback in and upload it to YouTube. The other search engines don't seem to have this feature. Slow motion and freeze frame are important. Exposing this video to the World with SSDS is important.

    Sorry about the lazy comment. Typing doesn't count as activity. Nor does whining and complaining. I'm getting my camcorder ready. I have the 8 sections of the 2008 quake video that I want to examine. This should be easy and extremely low tech.



  • @SpectateSwamp said:

    The Sichuan 2008 video needs reshooting.

    No it doesn't. There has never been a video that needed reshooting - editing maybe (after all reshooting is just a moronic way of editing a video).@SpectateSwamp said:

    Nobody can do it as easily as ol Swampie.

    Nobody else has ever wanted to reshoot a video you moron.@SpectateSwamp said:

    Just set SSDS to play back the 8 sections of interest from the first screen reshoot at 1/7 speed. Video that playback in and upload it to YouTube.

    Wonderful way to reduce the qulaity even further - so the video is already compressed and has artefacts, play it on a monitor which can introduce screen flicker and record this to introduce further compressoin artefacts before uploading to youtube where it will be compressed again introducing further compression artefacts. This really is the most moronic way to do things I could possibly imagine.@SpectateSwamp said:

    The other search engines don't seem to have this feature. Slow motion and freeze frame are important. Exposing this video to the World with SSDS is important.

    That is because this is a feature of a media player and not a search engine you buffoon, search engines should allow you to search for files you imbecile.@SpectateSwamp said:

    Sorry about the lazy comment. Typing doesn't count as activity. Nor does whining and complaining. I'm getting my camcorder ready. I have the 8 sections of the 2008 quake video that I want to examine. This should be easy and extremely low tech.

    We are not being lazy by refusing to do stuff nobody but you cares about, we are simply channelling our energies into making fun of you and your idiotic ideas.



  • Sichuan Earthquake Aliens exposed

    Dumb old re re reshoot video is now posted. Hurray I'm first. Nothing can beat SSDS for exposing aliens.

    30 mins before the 2008 Sichuan earthquake in China – 03:23
    — innison

     

     



  • Re: Sichuan Earthquake video compression artefacts exposed

    @SpectateSwamp said:

    Dumb old re re reshoot video is now posted. Hurray I'm first. Nothing can beat SSDS for exposing aliens.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KKMTSDzU1Z4

    As expected nothing more than a crappy, in and out of focus, blurred mess with hideous screen flicker and crappy red lines drawn over the compression artefacts.



  • @SpectateSwamp said:

    The Sichuan 2008 video needs reshooting

    What?@SpectateSwamp said:

    Nobody can do it as easily as ol Swampie. Just set SSDS to play back the 8 sections of interest from the first screen reshoot at 1/7 speed. Video that playback in and upload it to YouTube.

    Shouldn't you get ahold of the original video first?  The one on YouTube has compression artifacts out the ying yang.@SpectateSwamp said:

    The other search engines don't seem to have this feature.

    And why should they?@SpectateSwamp said:

    Slow motion and freeze frame are important.

    Oh.@SpectateSwamp said:

    Exposing this video to the World with SSDS is important.

    For strange definitions of important, I guess.



  • @SpectateSwamp said:

    Dumb old re re reshoot video is now posted. Hurray I'm first. Nothing can beat SSDS for exposing aliens.

    30 mins before the 2008 Sichuan earthquake in China – 03:23
    — innison

    That's the same damn video!  Where's the random?  Where's the ENTER ENTER ENTER?  Where's the slow mo?



  • @belgariontheking said:

    @SpectateSwamp said:

    Dumb old re re reshoot video is now posted. Hurray I'm first. Nothing can beat SSDS for exposing aliens.

    30 mins before the 2008 Sichuan earthquake in China – 03:23
    — innison

    That's the same damn video!  Where's the random?  Where's the ENTER ENTER ENTER?  Where's the slow mo?

    Don't forget that this already took him 11 hours to create.



  • You just get more Aliens with SSDS

    @bjolling said:

    Don't forget that this already took him 11 hours to create.

    I got them so they will randomly show on my computer. How good is that. All my Alien video and pictures all nicely sorted and cataloged like nobody else on the planet. Thanks SSDS

    The re re shoot really took the beauty out of the best clip. Much better on my laptop the time before. The TLF's Tobacco Leaf Flyer's seem to fade in and out when the original reshoot is slowed down. The other 6 active sections I looked at were alright. I sure would like to have the original video. Then slowing them down and watching would be at it's best.



  •  And, of course, you only respond to my lazy argument and not the "planes shake and move in the wind" because you have no answer to that.



  • @SpectateSwamp said:

    I got them so they will randomly show on my computer. How good is that. All my Alien video and pictures all nicely sorted and cataloged like nobody else on the planet. Thanks SSDS

    That is not good, that is quite possibly one of the furthest things from good anyone could do with their time that doesn't actually cause harm to other people.@SpectateSwamp said:

    The re re shoot really took the beauty out of the best clip.

    I assume this your way of saying 'caused the video quality to plummet even further due to increased compression artefacts and constant changes in focus'. After all if you take the beauty you are removing the beauty from the video - therefore making it ugly and painful to look at. @SpectateSwamp said:

    The TLF's Tobacco Leaf Flyer's seem to fade in and out when the original reshoot is slowed down.

    This is because the video is suffering from artefacts caused by compression - enough people have mentioned this so you should be starting to get the message.



  • More talk less action

    @spenk said:

    I assume this your way of saying 'caused the video quality to plummet even further due to increased compression artefacts and constant changes in focus'. After all if you take the beauty you are removing the beauty from the video - therefore making it ugly and painful to look at.

    I am sure you all could have produced the perfect showing for that 4-5 earthquake entity. But you didn't do anything. Sometimes waiting for perfect never happens.

    Boo to this: A lot more talk - less action group. Boo perfectionists. I don't much like artefacts or compression in my videos either.

     



  • @SpectateSwamp said:

    I am sure you all could have produced the perfect showing for that 4-5 earthquake entity. But you didn't do anything. Sometimes waiting for perfect never happens.

    Other than the fact the original is just showing compression artefacts there is nothing anyone could have done. However given the original source (assuming it is of sufficient quality) then a decent video editing tool could have extracted the relevant scenes and applied a slow motion effect.

    @SpectateSwamp said:

    Boo to this: A lot more talk - less action group.

    We just have no inclination to do do the mad things you seem to spend your time doing, none of us are wasting our time with your UFO obsession.

    @SpectateSwamp said:

    Boo perfectionists. I don't much like artefacts or compression in my videos either.

    Yet you choose a method of 'editing' that does everything possible to maximise them.



  • @spenk said:

    Yet you choose a method of 'editing' that does everything possible to maximise them.
     

    What you fail to realize, grasshopper, is that video editing is the worst you can do (see here). The only (I repeat: the ONLY) way of capturing the relevant parts of a video is to play-back the video using SSDS in slow motion while pointing your camcorder to the screen and videoing the playback! There's a lot you need to learn, grasshopper...



  • @tdittmar said:

    @spenk said:
    Yet you choose a method of 'editing' that does everything possible to maximise them.
    What you fail to realize, grasshopper, is that video editing is the worst you can do (see here). The only (I repeat: the ONLY) way of capturing the relevant parts of a video is to play-back the video using SSDS in slow motion while pointing your camcorder to the screen and videoing the playback! There's a lot you need to learn, grasshopper...

    QFT. Thanks, TdittmarSwamp.



  • More talk needed


    On my display that last crappy video is about 4 times better. No extra reshoot and no upload to flash or whatever. So when I go viewing videos on the net. I can look for artifacts and compressions. I know with SSDS I can easily investigate and check it out. I'm sure other video of that days' earthquake anomalies; would confirm the TLF's.

    Is nobody else checking net video out! Or do I have to do all the searching and finding with SSDS.
     



  • @SpectateSwamp said:

    On my display that last crappy video is about 4 times better. No extra reshoot and no upload to flash or whatever.

    WTF are you on about? You are making even less sense than usual. @SpectateSwamp said:

    So when I go viewing videos on the net. I can look for artifacts and compressions. I know with SSDS I can easily investigate and check it out. I'm sure other video of that days' earthquake anomalies; would confirm the TLF's.

    WTF are you on about? How does SSDS have anything to do with watching a video on the web?@SpectateSwamp said:

    Is nobody else checking net video out! Or do I have to do all the searching and finding with SSDS.

    We are not looking at compression artefacts and calling them aliens, How are you apparently searching internet videos with SSDS when I couldn't even get it to search for a file! 



  • @spenk said:

    WTF are you on about? How does SSDS have anything to do with watching a video on the web?

    We are not looking at compression artefacts and calling them aliens, How are you apparently searching internet videos with SSDS when I couldn't even get it to search for a file! 

     

    Maybe, old Swampie once wrote some code, compiled it, and saw that he made a program. Immediately afterward, he discovered the result of all his downloading and clicking and found a file manager, image/video editor, etc. He couldn't remember how he got those programs, so he assumed he created them. And that was how SSDS was born. It's all a figment of SS's imagination.



  • @SpectateSwamp said:

    I can look for artifacts and compressions. I know with SSDS I can easily investigate and check it out.

    Er... I think someone told you before, but artifacts aren't a sign of a supernatural being, a conspiracy or aliens. It is just a technical thing that happens if you compress videos. To improve their visibility (what sane people tend to call "reduce video quality"), you can simply save them at a higher compression rate. No editing or "re-shooting" required at all.

    And friggen NO, birds can not see them, simply because THEY ARE NOT THERE before the video gets compressed in your camera.

    Someone should buy swampy a camera which utilizes lossless compression methods. I can see him re-shooting, re-re-shooting and (re)³-shooting the same video, staring at the screen and slowly realizing that there might not be a hidden message behind lossy compression after all.



  • Re-Reshooting works with SSDS

    @derula said:

    @SpectateSwamp said:
    I can look for artifacts and compressions. I know with SSDS I can easily investigate and check it out.
    Er... I think someone told you before, but artifacts aren't a sign of a supernatural being, a conspiracy or aliens. It is just a technical thing that happens if you compress videos. To improve their visibility (what sane people tend to call "reduce video quality"), you can simply save them at a higher compression rate. No editing or "re-shooting" required at all.

    And friggen NO, birds can not see them, simply because THEY ARE NOT THERE before the video gets compressed in your camera.

    Someone should buy swampy a camera which utilizes lossless compression methods. I can see him re-shooting, re-re-shooting and (re)³-shooting the same video, staring at the screen and slowly realizing that there might not be a hidden message behind lossy compression after all.

     

     

    Yeah yeah. But what if other video of the Sichuan 2008 earthquake anomalies shows these Tobacco Leaf Flyers. Then what?

    One of the other Sichuan segments showed a flight path with strikingly similar movements, to my TLF video.

     Even with the reduced quality that reshooting produces. I still get to see more that the rest of the viewers who don't have SSDS to replay it slowed down. It's easy to catalogue and view my favorite aliens in super slow motion with a freeze on that special frame.

     



  • @SpectateSwamp said:

    Yeah yeah. But what if other video of the Sichuan 2008 earthquake anomalies shows these Tobacco Leaf Flyers. Then what?

    Wow, you are right. That is a valid argument! ... for a two-year-old with serious brain damage and paranoia.

    @SpectateSwamp said:

    It's easy to catalogue and view my favorite aliens in super slow motion with a freeze on that special frame.

    At least there's something you can enjoy in this crappy world. Maybe one day you'll be happily married to one of your favorite aliens and she'll give birth to a very special frame.



  • @SpectateSwamp said:

    Yeah yeah. But what if other video of the Sichuan 2008 earthquake anomalies shows these Tobacco Leaf Flyers. Then what?

    One of the other Sichuan segments showed a flight path with strikingly similar movements, to my TLF video.

    From personal experience I am of the opinion that a leaf being blown by the wind behaves pretty much the same regardless of location, I would therefore assume a leaf was blowing in the wind on the Sichuan video just as I believe it was a leaf in your video.
    @SpectateSwamp said:

    Even with the reduced quality that reshooting produces. I still get to see more that the rest of the viewers who don't have SSDS to replay it slowed down.

    You are only seeing things because of the reduced quality that reshooting introduces, if the quality wasn't so crappy there wouldn't be any artefacts to see. SSDS has bugger all to do with viewing a video in slow motion WMP that is included with Windows can play videos in slow motion with a simple and easy to use slider to control the speed - what benefit does SSDS offer with it's cryptic commands?



  • Video is more fun with SSDS

    @spenk said:

    From personal experience I am of the opinion that a leaf being blown by the wind behaves pretty much the same regardless of location, I would therefore assume a leaf was blowing in the wind on the Sichuan video just as I believe it was a leaf in your video.

     

    Leaf maybe but what are all the other flyers in the video

    If you look real close in this original file. You'll see.

    Use Nero or other video editor and check it out frame by frame. Maybe then you can tell me how fast that leaf was moving.

    I use SSDS to catalog them for multiple plays of the same mini clip with different final freeze frames. Others just can't do that. I only keep the original files around, so no mess of mini clips unless they are reshoots.

     

     



  • @SpectateSwamp said:

    Leaf maybe but what are all the other flyers in the video

    If you look real close in this original file. You'll see.

    Going out on a limb here but I would say 'leaves' on the 'wind', due to the fact it is windy and they are leaves.@SpectateSwamp said:

    I use SSDS to catalog them for multiple plays of the same mini clip with different final freeze frames. Others just can't do that. I only keep the original files around, so no mess of mini clips unless they are reshoots.

    Why not just edit the minute clip into one or two shorter clips that show the bits you are interested in, that video is 90% (probably more) of watching a wire blown by the wind with a couple of leaves blown past - the scenes with a leaf in are probably less than 5 seconds in total so editing would make sense (I know it doesn't make sense to you, I am just stating this for the record). Reshoots are a shit idea though as they reduce the quality far more than a decent editor would do.



  • @spenk said:

    Reshoots are a shit an amazing idea though as they reduce the quality improve the visibility of those fliers far more than a decent editor would do.

    FTFY.



  • Re-shoots better than nothing

    @spenk said:

    Why not just edit the minute clip into one or two shorter clips that show the bits you are interested in, that video is 90% (probably more) of watching a wire blown by the wind with a couple of leaves blown past - the scenes with a leaf in are probably less than 5 seconds in total so editing would make sense (I know it doesn't make sense to you, I am just stating this for the record). Reshoots are a shit idea though as they reduce the quality far more than a decent editor would do.

     

    Yeah but re-shoots are so easy and quick. And still better than doing nothing at all. With SSDS and videoing in the screen. I get to see more than the average Joe. Sharing video is about doing the best you can (or want to) do. Each time you re-render a video you lose resolution.  So the originals are always best. For those who are into editing video. Please do a better job than me. I'll look. I'm pretty sure that MCI playback doesn't show every frame of the tobacco leaf flyer. Use your video editor to expose that!



  • @SpectateSwamp said:

    Each time you re-render a video you lose resolution.

    If by resolution you mean quality (or detail, or information), you're right. But the same happens in re-shoots.

    @SpectateSwamp said:

    I'm pretty sure that MCI playback doesn't show every frame of the tobacco leaf flyer.

    I'm not a video expert, but I'm pretty sure that with usual video compression, the frames are linked in a way which makes it pretty hard to skip single frames without making the video look weird. It would have to be done on purpose.



    To get more information out of a digital video, there are two things you can do:

    1. Stop the player / editor at a certain position and skip back and forth between frames until you are at that single frame you want to see
    2. Get the video in a better quality.

    The latter cannot be achieved by "re-shooting", re-compressing, jamming or SSDSing. The only way is to either know someone who has it in better quality, or to go back to the location and film it again, with a better camera.

    Your argument is like saying: "Of course I know our environment is in danger. You perfect perfects don't have to tell me. I drive my SUV for at least 6 hours every day.", us replying "Spectate, pointlessly driving an SUV doesn't help the environment.", and you arguing "You're right, it might not be much, but at least I'm taking action, you're not. Lazy, lazy people. With SSDS, I can rid the world of GlobalWarming. Boo perfect perfects."

    To summarize: THAT DOESN'T EVEN MAKE SENSE YOU RETARD.



  • @SpectateSwamp said:

    Yeah but re-shoots are so easy and quick.

    A decent editor however would take a fraction of the time to produce the shorter clips and wouldn't cause such a massive reduction in quality either.@SpectateSwamp said:

    Each time you re-render a video you lose resolution.

    A decent editor wouldn't rerender the majority of the clip anyway so the quality wouldn't be reduced for most of the clip - a reshoot will take longer and reduce the quality more.



  • Perfect Perfects results coming soon.

     

    Yes. DerulaSwamp the Perfect Perfects results are always better. But most often their response is too late to be of any value. Perfect takes time your know. While the imperfect dullards go merrily about our worry free ways. Using proven trial and error methods. Change it, jam it, and change it again. Don't think do. With good backup nothing is destroyed during the tests. Other than a few trillion electrons.

    The PP's don't know how to jam it, maybe tofu or caviar it. But not Jam jam it. 

    I want to see the PP's video response to the Scihuan 2008 Earthquake. Surely you can do better than ol Swampie



  • @SpectateSwamp said:

    Perfect takes time your know.

    Oh yes, believe me, I do know. Takes time, so much time. But it's the ultimate result that counts.

    @SpectateSwamp said:

    The PP's don't know how to jam it, maybe tofu or caviar it. But not Jam jam it.

    I would feel sorry if I jammed my codebase. I've come a long way, and it's still a long way to go. Don't want to ruin the potential quality of the end result.



  • @SpectateSwamp said:

    I'm pretty sure that MCI playback doesn't show every frame of the tobacco leaf flyer.

    MCI? Do you want me to flat thunk that DLL while I’m at it?



  • Let others share too

     

    Help others to share right back. Just like sharing a good meal. Most people want to be able to return the favour.
    When dealing with first time sharers. Listen to their ideas and happily take a copy. Encourage them as much as you can.

    Derula I'll take a copy of your codebase library.

     



  • @SpectateSwamp said:

    Derula I'll take a copy of your codebase library.

    I'm sorry, it doesn't do random video. Also, the numerous meaningful comments are in German for the most part, so they probably won't help you. Also, it's not written in VB5, and it's not available anywhere in the net... yet.

    But if you like, take this. Doesn't do random video, is not in VB5, but at least it has English comments, and is a *.txt file. You won't be able to open it in notepad however, try Wordpad or something. Maybe Notepad++.



  •  I want to be a swampie. Really, I do. So what I did, was I took the code to SSDS, opened it in VB6, swore repeatedly, and then took 5 hours going through the code in a tedious fashion, cleaning it up. I also added "Option Explicit" to the top, to force variable declaration. Once I removed all the useless crap from the source, I was left with this:

     

    Option Explicit

    Shit! ok, well, a fresh start never hurt.

     

    Thus was born BCSearch .

     

    It does NOT solve all the worlds problems, like SSDS. Hell, that older version has a lot of flaws. It does however, have several distinct advantages, like I actually know WTF is going on in the code to add features (no line numbers, either).

     Unlike Old Swampie here, I make no claims that this will solve all the ills of society. Hell, I make no guarantees the fucking thing will work at all; Really I'm just tired of seeing people like SpectateSwamp here give VB6 programmers a bad name. We aren't all the spawn of coke-addicted mothers, and some of us type using our fingers, rather then developing VB code by constantly smashing ones skull into the keyboard until it breaks, and then spending their free time exacerbating lossy compression artifacts in movies in order to make some point about aliens and tobacco, which I can only assume involves aliens smoking said tobacco. The problem is, taking lossy compression artifacts as truth has some existential implications. for example, SpectateSwamp, try this interesting experiment:

     

    Create a jpeg file. draw box.

     

    save it. Open it, repeat about 20-30 times, oh, make sure totape this, so you can recam your discoveries over and over and over.

     

    dear me!

     

    where... where did the box go? It's just a blur! Did the box ever exist? I remember drawing it, but... dear gawd! It was aliens manipulating my thoughts! they made me THINK that I  seeing a box, when in fact I was looking into the aliens inner psyche in the form of a ... blue blur.

     

    Then, you can take a few "recams" of your discovery, trying to prove that what you in fact just did was not what really happened but was rather not what happened based on the concrete evidence of some lossy jpegs and even more lossy mpegs that really only succeed in not only proving that your IQ is less then your shoe size,but also that it is the lowest common denominator when it comes to not just VB6 programmers, but really any programmers anywhere, and that perhaps when Jane Goodall was documenting your habits, she should have left you there, instead of shoving you into her fanny pack and bringing you back to North America, where you unleashed such horrible pieces of shit programs, namely, of course, SSDS, that it is unbelievable that you even posess an IQ at all.

     And then,  to top it all off, you simply respond to criticism with calm and cool responses in a condescending tone. This does not change the fact that you are challenged in more ways then you can count (which could easily be 1, since that's likely your upper limit for numbers- hell, you use SSDS to count for you, because you added a "Counting featur" specifically for that task. The fact of the matter is people don't WANT to use your program because it is a piece of shit. your program is to programming what a shit-stain on toilet paper is to literature; and people won't USE your program because it is a shit stain, and people sure as hell don't want to watch video's about the various amazing discoveries you've found with SSDS because you can SMELL the shit-stain visually, it's just that bad.

     

    However, it's not all bad. Since your so experienced making shit-stains, maybe you can do your duty and clean them up instead by becoming a janitor somewhere?

     



  • @BC_Programmer said:

    Thus was born BCSearch .

    A close to 4 meg MSI file? Really?

    Bstorer started porting SSDS to VB.Net and look what that did to him. Keep what's left of your sanity and ignore this thread.



  •  No offense, BC_Programmer, but the design of your website's front page doesn't exactly make me confident in your abilities as a programmer. It's hardly readable, and if that's readable to you, I don't want to peek at your code.



  • @bob171123 said:

     No offense, BC_Programmer, but the design of your website's front page doesn't exactly make me confident in your abilities as a programmer. It's hardly readable, and if that's readable to you, I don't want to peek at your code.

    Actually, his design skills (or lack thereof) remind me of my own ones, which makes me feel comfortable.



  •  Yeah, I know. I've been meaning to make it not look like shit some day, I never was all that great with web page design.

     

    Actually... scratch that... I probably could make it look great, but every minute I spent fiddling with CSS or  HTML is painful,



  •  You could start by not putting dark text on a dark background. That would contribute immensely to the readability of your pages. I guess another reason I'm not comfortable trying it is that it was inspired by good ol' SSDS. Well, you did manage to strip it down to Option Explicit, so maybe it would be worthwhile to try your program out.



  •  in all honestly what I have there is basically thrown together HTML and CSS; I'm going to get around to making it not look like shit one of these days. (I modified the CSS to NOT use background images for most things, which should at least make the front page easier to read, if not still hugely amatuerish.

     

    Also; I was kind of making up the whole "inspired by SDSS" thing. The only thing SDSS can inspire would probably be suicide, or mass murder. which one depends entirely on ones personality.

     In truth it's really just a way for me to use my "BCFile" File manipulation library; the original idea was to simply create something like the windows 98 Search applet, since I cannot stand the XP equivalent. (Vista's search seems a lot better, however).

     

    It's certainly no competitor to any of the real desktop search applications, like google desktop or even the built in search tools in most operating systems, I don't even try to fool myself into thinking that even remotely; the fact that they overlap almost entirely with those of the windows search tool or any number of established search applications would pretty much make any actual "commercial" application like it doomed to fail from the start. Since I always have the project open I try to use it every once in a while so I can get a feel for what it needs, and for some reason "randomly choosing music files" never came up as a requirement.

     

    Oh, and it actually supports files with no extension or files with extensions longer then 3 characters. Hell, I never even considered it something that needed "supporting" since it's pretty much an intrinsic rule that if your going to support the input of data you actually support- you know, the import of data.


    I wonder what other surprises SDSS will have in store? perhaps it could force the user to enter the filename in 8.3 format because swampie decided to save RAM by redeclaring the filename variable as "Dim b1112333 As String*12", and you all know that it's perfectly intuitive to type in file and folder names like C:\PROGRA~1\MICROS~2

     

    but dammit! tildes aren't supported by SDSS, because they SHOULD be used to indicate how many other files are in the folder, I mean, it just makes intuitive sense, like a yeti and blue mountain dew, you don't believe they exist until you see them.

     

    Hmm, that analogy doesn't make any sense. I think I'll stop now.



  • @BC_Programmer said:

    The only thing SDSS can inspire would probably be suicide, or mass murder. which one depends entirely on ones personality.

    Well, there's a third option. It can also inspire you to become a stone dancer, investigate about aliens, find some dinosaur skin, and ultimately save the world. But this only works for so-called "swampies". The latter should be considered an "ironic plural" though, meaning that, in reality, the word "swampies" only refers to a single person.



  • Random music doesn't become monotonous

    @BC_Programmer said:

    Since I always have the project open I try to use it every once in a while so I can get a feel for what it needs, and for some reason "randomly choosing music files" never came up as a requirement.

    Keep going with your Search. The big players in desktop search just don't get it. What sorta works for billions of web pages doesn't when matched up against SSDS. And random is key. If you had tons of family pictures you'd realize the importance. If you had thousands of video clips you would know. I sometimes forget that few, if any of you have or use video to the degree that I do. I probably keep more notes that the rest of you too. Because it's easy for me. SSDS allows me to backup 1 folder and have all my valuable data secure. With secure data. I don't worry about anything.

    SSDS code may be not so perfect when it comes to coding standards. But as some of us know, that doesn't matter an iota. If it isn't broke don't fix it. Don't look a gift horse in the mouth. So many of the old adages hold true here. Sharing your imperfect source is brave of you. Good going.

     



  • Spectate, this is the least nutty I've ever seen you... for the first time I've ever seen you, you've managed to actually recognize that we don't do the same things you do and thus we don't see the same value in your application as you do. This is great, and the first step (out of about 3,000) towards being a worthwhile contributor to the forum.

    The next step is acknowledging that if you ever program another application, you must adopt better coding standards. Repeat after me: Object Oriented Modular Patterns are the wave of the future!



  •  

    @SpectateSwamp said:


    SSDS code may be not so perfect when it comes to coding standards. But as some of us know, that doesn't matter an iota. If it isn't broke don't fix it. Don't look a gift horse in the mouth. So many of the old adages hold true here. Sharing your imperfect source is brave of you. Good going.

     



    You know what, RHuckster, after this statement I feel inclined to agree with you. The one argument I have against swampie's statement is that if you share imperfect source that doesn't follow some sort of convention, it only makes it harder for whoever wants to contribute to your project to actually contribute to your project. They would first have to learn your way of doing things, and if they feel they have more important things to do, then it remains only your project.



  • @SpectateSwamp said:

    @BC_Programmer said:

    Since I always have the project open I try to use it every once in a while so I can get a feel for what it needs, and for some reason "randomly choosing music files" never came up as a requirement.

    SSDS code may be not so perfect when it comes to coding standards. But as some of us know, that doesn't matter an iota. If it isn't broke don't fix it.

    "if it ain't broke don't fix it" is right, but I believe there's another saying for doing things properly. Oh, and that whole "you can't polish a terd" thing, since- I mean, that damn near applies literally when we speak of SDSS.

     @SpectateSwamp said:

     Don't look a gift horse in the mouth.

    I don't see how that's relevant. SDSS isn't a gift horse, it's like that bag of shit that teenagers put on peoples doorsteps that they light on fire. You try to fix it and stop it from getting worse, but you just end up with shit on your shoes. 


    Sharing your imperfect source is brave of you. Good going.

     

     

    I never shared the source. I would, but that will be an even bigger pain in the but to package then the program itself, and I'd have to make tricky decisions like, "do I include the typelib and the IDL source, or just the typelib?" ... but now that you mention it, there are absolutely no unnecessary Gotos, as is the case with SDSS. I have errorhandler labels, and a few number labels where I was trying to narrow down a specific issue that was (I can only imagine) crashing both the program and taking the IDE with it (comes with the territory when you start messing with stuff no VB6 program really should be doing). Also, it's interesting to note that one of my other projects, a Expression evaluation "engine", had a single "GoSub" (basically a goto that knows where to return), that I had inserted to prevent the duplication of a few lines of code. When I finally got around to abstracting that into it's own procedure, I discovered that the speed of the entire thing increased by a factor of 3; this was, after all, a very core level routine. This is a result of a number of boring technical things that aren't compiled properly when targeting native code, namely, stupid programming constructs like goto and gosub.

      @SpectateSwamp said:

    if any of you have or use video to the degree that I do.

     

    It doesn't take a genius to understand that using a lossy compression scheme over and over again with a shitty 99 cent camera is going to result in strange artifacts  It does however take a inept, mentally challenged psychotic schizo to believe that these strange artifacts are something other then, you know, strange artifacts. when the "tobacco leaf" makes strange shapes, you either point and laugh at the retard who created the video, or the recam, or perhaps the recam that is being recamed in the recam, but you don't instantly jump to the conclusion that a few errant pixels are proof of an other-worldly encounter. In the same vein I could easily say that the three dead pixels on my previous monitor were an indication straight from another world that said "all yur pixelz r belong to us" but I don't.



  • Swampies and more Swampies

    What the hey sombody is stealing my posts???

     

     

    My video tips. I do have swampies I do I do. Wooo Hooo



  • @SpectateSwamp said:

    What the hey sombody is stealing my posts???

    Thanks for the new forum signature!



  • Swampies Real Swampies

    @derula said:

    Thanks for the new forum signature!

    Nope VegasarianSwamp is some kind of video expert that is hanging on my every word.

    You are almost there Derula (extreme denial) is the final stage before complete acceptance.

    What a christmas present that was. A real true bonified Swampie.

    P.S. I hope you all had a nice Christmas. I'm not really christian, except for the holidays.



  • @SpectateSwamp said:

    P.S. I hope you all had a nice Christmas. I'm not really christian, except for the holidays.

     

    Same to you buddy. Nowadays, that really describes most Americans, so saying Christmas isn't so much a religious expression as it is an expression of consumerism.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @bob171123 said:

    @SpectateSwamp said:

    P.S. I hope you all had a nice Christmas. I'm not really christian, except for the holidays.
    Same to you buddy. Nowadays, that really describes most Americans'Christians', so saying Christmas isn't so much a religious expression as it is an expression of consumerism.

    FTFY



    Apropos of nothing: An Atheist Looks At Christmas

    As an atheist, I am sometimes asked by Christians how I can celebrate and legitimately enjoy the Christmas holiday.

    However, I think this challenge is be misconceived.

    Christmas has little, if anything, to do with Christianity - even if Jesus was indeed Christ.

Log in to reply

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.