It is pretty neat and several resources online explaining it but it chunks the recoding and does a hash of the fft of each frame i think which reduces the data a lot. The server has a pre hashed database https://hackernoon.com/how-shazam-works-in-a-nutshell
TV shows are completed and in the can well before air date. It is entirely plausible that the interested party in having the content identifiable by Shazam like services submit whatever needs to be submitted for new content
I have also wondered about the possibility of media emitting some kind of hidden identifier. Can normal speakers emit noise outside of human hearing that could contain a unique id? Would not even need to be a lot of data that could be broadcast.
Yes, it's possible. Some sports broadcasts do this. The ones I'm familiar with use a high pitched tone on the edge of human hearing but still audible to most people.
Streaming services watermark the video as opposed to the audio as I understand it.
But that's for tracing pirated content back to the originating user account. It's not particularly useful (also entirely unnecessary and overly complicated) if your goal is to ID a piece of content as opposed to an account.
That's not necessary. If a service has access to the raw audio of a show, it can fingerprint each second of that audio in a way that can be matched in a tiny amount of computation even for a recording in a noisy environment.
That can't recognize what you say. But, it can ID where you are in a specific show out of zillions of hours of shows.
I know a guy who made a Shazam-like phone app that can listen to a few seconds of noisy audio and make a fingerprint that can be used to quickly ID those specific few seconds out of a pre-fingerprinted archive of an enormous amount of audio (zillions of hours of TV). Making the fingerprint requires a tiny amount of very smart code (in C with no dependencies). But, the fingerprint is not useful for understanding audio that's not in the archive.
In the past 15 years, I have purchased five Lumix cameras including the new L10 (which I have yet to receive). I like their cameras a lot. The dedication to pursue this battle is another reason I am certain to buy more.
Though the lawsuits are more complex with multiple parties suing RED, of which Nikon also fought RED and ended up buying them out to win that side of the battle. On the panasonic side it was more of their cinema line of cameras rather than Lumix that was the driver (though they have trickle down)
And prores isn’t necessarily RAW, it’s just one of the variants.
> Lumix and Red cameras have almost no market overlap.
Wrong, in the sense that market overlap doesn't matter. Here's an example of a Micro Four Thirds camera (system stewarded by Panasonic) that had to nerf its RAW output in a firmware update due to this patent:
> Z-CAM […] violated the famous RED patent and will pay for it soon
> The ZRAW actually stores RAW directly from Bayer sensor and not YUV as claimed (conversion happens in computer software, camera stores real linear raw). It means that they actually store real RAW on Z-CAM E2!
I have been very lucky with a washer/dryer pair from Samsung that have only needed two minor repairs in 12 years of near-daily use. A heating element for the dryer. A new door seal and, later, a pump for the washer.
My 7 year old LG inverter microwave has been flawless and is the best microwave I have ever used.
My 10 year old pair of LG 4K computer monitors have been great—they still hold a color calibration quite well.
My recently-purchased, and expensive, LG C5 OLED TV has a spectacular picture but is a finicky, ad-ware festooned nightmare. It demands attention to near-daily updates where the updates list contains ads and promotions that I have to scroll through and dismiss to find the actual updates. It is tiring to deal with and especially because the remote control is a ridiculously gimmicky “air remote” where I have to carefully aim it at tiny targets which, even from three feet away, is challenging to do and so unnecessary.
The TV and this story about unauthorized software installations has cured me of interest in new LG offerings.
I have an LG Ultrawide 38" monitor for which I haven't found an equivalent at any price point. I bought it during COVID and it's been fantastic ever since.
It's the only cable I connect to my laptop when I sit on my desk. It provides power, a webcam, wired ethernet and speakers (not the built-in ones which are actually not the worst but still bad).
I also have a CX OLED and I concur the image is best in class - though I wish it was a tad brighter. I have it connected to the Internet but I limit what it can connect to using Egress Eddie on my router, which means it can do Ad-Free YouTube and a couple other streaming services - as well as a selection of websites from the built-in browser.
I do have a few LG and one has internet access for NetFlix and crap. But I'm blocking almost every other connection for years because it's too abusive.
But this extends to Android devices, Windows, etc.
Almost every device that has internet, will do this. We have to thank the advertising ** people for this. But internet is broken almost from the start. They just got it impossible to use without protection to ads and spyware.
I concur about the picture quality of their OLEDs - it's incredible. But I can't say anything about their interface or software - I've not seen them for probably a year+ at this point. The Apple TV remote turns it off/on, and adjusts the volume. The LG has not been provided internet access.
reply