[vorbis] New decode chip

[Shawn]

I remember it.  Specifically, it is genetic algorithms as they relate to
FPGAs.
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/12/29/007258&mode=thread&tid=137

At issue is whether you could feed it the source (an ogg) and a dest
(name your output fmt) and expect an ogg decoder to evolve. I think then
you'd get a specific this file to that file changer.

You'd need to break the ogg encoding functions into their atomic pieces
and then evolve routines to duplicate the functionality. It's
non-trivial just to plan such an undertaking for ogg vorbis.

Even then, there's a question about how deterministic the behavior of
these magic programs would be, especially on different hardware.

Just wait for clockless, analog and FPGA based systems, then /maybe/
quantum computing. They'll probably each find a niche in very different
hardware. (FPGA's have potential in PDAs on up, but qbits will always
likely be the realm of larger systems)

On 08/05, Oliver D. Jones said something like:
> Does anyone remember that experiment done in New Scientist, where they
> had a FPGA "mutate" until it did a specific job well enough? I wonder if
> something similar could be done to encode Ogg Vorbis. It might come up
> with some improvements that even the cleverest hand-tuners may miss.
> 
> Oliver.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-vorbis at xiph.org [mailto:owner-vorbis at xiph.org] On Behalf Of
> Anthony Frazier
> Sent: Monday, August 05, 2002 9:53 PM
> To: vorbis at xiph.org
> Subject: Re: [vorbis] New decode chip
> 
> 
> On 5 Aug 2002 at 22:28, Olaf Marzocchi wrote:
> 
> > Newbie question: every time we reach a better compression we have to 
> > use
> > more power (rar compared to zip, mp3 to one of the first compression 
> > schemes, divx compared to cinepak,...). Ogg compress more than mp3 but
> at 
> > about the same speed.
> > Is there an explanation to a such silly question?
> 
> The easy answer: "Vorbis works smarter, not harder."
> 
> Actually, Vorbis is slower at encoding than some of the better tuned mp3
> 
> encoders, but that's mostly because it hasn't had the time to be tuned
> as 
> much.
> 
> I imagine that if someone wanted to fork the Vorbis encoder and give it
> lots 
> of hand tuning and assembly code, you could probably get some pretty
> hefty 
> improvements.  (For example, like GoGo derived from Lame.)
> 
> Pax,
> 
> Anthony Frazier
> 
> 
> --- >8 ----
> List archives:  http://www.xiph.org/archives/
> Ogg project homepage: http://www.xiph.org/ogg/
> To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to
> 'vorbis-request at xiph.org' containing only the word 'unsubscribe' in the
> body.  No subject is needed. Unsubscribe messages sent to the list will
> be ignored/filtered.
> 
> 
> 
> --- >8 ----
> List archives:  http://www.xiph.org/archives/
> Ogg project homepage: http://www.xiph.org/ogg/
> To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to 'vorbis-request at xiph.org'
> containing only the word 'unsubscribe' in the body.  No subject is needed.
> Unsubscribe messages sent to the list will be ignored/filtered.

--
Shawn Leas
core at enodev.com

On the other hand, you have different fingers...
						-- Stephen Wright

<p>--- >8 ----
List archives:  http://www.xiph.org/archives/
Ogg project homepage: http://www.xiph.org/ogg/
To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to 'vorbis-request at xiph.org'
containing only the word 'unsubscribe' in the body.  No subject is needed.
Unsubscribe messages sent to the list will be ignored/filtered.