| Re: Attn: JimBoss, Isis, etc..Astraweb, Giganews - speed? |
EasyNews, UseNet made Ea .. |
| Hubchy (ablank.field@nothing.com) |
2009/09/01 17:44 |
Path: news.nzbot.com!spool1.sonic-news.com!pullnews.sonic-news.com!not-for-mail
From: Hubchy <ablank.field@nothing.com>
Newsgroups: alt.binaries.dvd.criterion
Subject: Re: Attn: JimBoss, Isis, etc..Astraweb, Giganews - speed?
Message-ID: <gecr95l57vcorn4nb6i76pfpoijvistd18@4ax.com>
References: <9ulm959g3d088vpruthjtu5i78b7g851nq@4ax.com> <rpmm95d85k5b7acmc0at5rauho5p9in39b@4ax.com> <748q95hcs091n7bku031hifppuh36kl63b@4ax.com> <mgbq95pj1fl6tr95qbo5j4poovog7t1jdo@4ax.com> <020920090431463485%timhow99@yahoo.com.au> <olrq95lc2mtr827dc4q0gv4f2hg8radurb@4ax.com>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 4.2/32.1118
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 48
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: EasyNews, UseNet made Easy!
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Wed, 02 Sep 2009 11:44:18 +1200
Xref: news.nzbot.com alt.binaries.dvd.criterion:1988
On Tue, 01 Sep 2009 14:40:49 -0500, Isis <isis55423@hotpop.com> wrote:
>On Wed, 02 Sep 2009 04:31:46 +1000, Tim Howard <timhow99@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
>
><snip>
>
>:Smaller articles result in better propagation.
>
>Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.
Slightly OT but... I love your skeptical mantra. A great version of
Occam's Razor to apply to claims such as those made about alien
abductions, satanic ritual abuse, Homeopathy, etc.
>
>If you mean that a 256 KB article has a better chance of propagating than a
>1.28 MB article, then I suppose you are correct.
>
>You had better be, since you will need to post five times as many to equal the
>same amount of data.
>
>If, as JimB0ss says, it is perfectly OK to post a 45 GB Blu-ray using 1.28 MB
>articles (that would be more than 35,000 articles), then why not post DVDs with
>35,000 articles?
>
>256 KB wouldn't even be enough. (2000 yEnc)
>
>But if smaller is better, then why not just post 64 KB articles? (5000 yEnc)
>
>Wouldn't that be even better yet? (Your above statement would seem to say that.)
>
>If you intend to draw a line in the sand where the most optimum article size
>resides, then please tell us the reasoning you used in making that
>determination.
>
>I really would like to do an analysis of your binary posts. Where do you post
>and under what 'nym?
>
>Isis
I'm clearly confused. I thought that when you talked about the
'largest sized article' (1.28 mbs) that you were referring to
something like a binary RAR (as part of a series). So, for instance, I
assumed that each 120 mb RAR posted in the Carl Dreyer 'My Metier'
film constitutes one article.
Maybe each RAR actually consists of vast numbers of articles?
Hubchy
|
|
|