?

Log in

No account? Create an account
Who, me? [userpic]

Unclear on the concept

March 4th, 2009 (02:28 pm)

The CS department mailing list (*) just sent out this gem, from Intel's recruiting team:

You are invited to join Intel for a Virtual Webcast.

So...it'll be kinda online, but not really?

(*) I finished my degree, but they've still got me on the list; I've decided not to get off it until I've got my diploma in hand.

Comments

Posted by: C. Virtue (cvirtue)
Posted at: March 4th, 2009 07:40 pm (UTC)

Speaking of which, a suspiciously-sized, slightly spongy large paper envelope arrived from your school today. I suspect it is the long-awaited diploma.

Posted by: Who, me? (metageek)
Posted at: March 4th, 2009 07:46 pm (UTC)

Ooh!

Posted by: dsrtao (dsrtao)
Posted at: March 4th, 2009 08:09 pm (UTC)

They send an intern out to the conference room. He dials up the conference number on a speaker phone, then starts flipping pages on the easel...

Posted by: Who, me? (metageek)
Posted at: March 4th, 2009 08:19 pm (UTC)

Frighteningly plausible.

Posted by: goldsquare (goldsquare)
Posted at: March 4th, 2009 08:21 pm (UTC)

Hint: A Virtual Webcast has Actual Doughnuts.

:-)

Posted by: metahacker (metahacker)
Posted at: March 4th, 2009 11:10 pm (UTC)
screw up

I think I was at such a webcast today.

...actually no. But the conference software had an interesting glitch: the audio stream would pause, and when it resumed it would CATCH UP, with ridiculously-sped-up audio. It was awesome. For moderate pauses it was mostly like trying to listen to a blind person's screen-reader; for longer, it was total gobbledigook.

Posted by: Who, me? (metageek)
Posted at: March 5th, 2009 02:09 pm (UTC)
Boggle

That's...stunning. That can't happen by accident—if you pump data to the audio device faster, it doesn't get played back faster; it just fills up the buffer. Someone must have said, "Hmm, we're getting jitter; how can we fix it?", and rejected the obvious idea of dropping packets like everybody else in the world. Instead, they're doing the FFTs to speed up playback. (To be fair, depending on their codec, it might be more a matter of tweaking the knobs on FFTs that are already happening.)

Posted by: metahacker (metahacker)
Posted at: March 7th, 2009 01:13 pm (UTC)
Re: Boggle
keys

Yes! It was quite surprising. My conclusion is that they built in the catch-up technology to cover small gaps -- I can see it working well for <0.5 second glitches, which "should" cover the normal network transit case -- but left out a cut-off for how long to wait to queue up old data.

It seemed like an engineer somewhere got overly interested in a complex solution, where everyone else just uses a straightforward buffer...

Posted by: C. Virtue (cvirtue)
Posted at: March 4th, 2009 08:53 pm (UTC)

Another possibility: they left out some letters:

You are invited to join Intel for a virtually useless Webcast.

9 Read Comments