[Edmund[_2_]]

On Tue, 13 Dec 2011 19:20:52 +0000, dave a wrote:

On 12/13/2011 4:12 AM, Edmund wrote:


That IS the speech defect I am talking about! If that IS the new
definition that definition is plain wrong and misleading. Never before
in no other branch compression ever meant throwing away data or
material.
If you end up with less data ( or gas in another area ) then you did
not "compress" it, then you reduced the data by throwing away data and
information.
I suggested before not to call the MP3 reduction- "compression" because
it isn't. Lets call it what it is and forget this idiotic "Lossy
Compression" which is a contradiction in terminus and "lossless
compression", compression always was lossless per definition and I mean
the right definition not the raped one. Using the proper terms for
things makes it easier to understand.

Edmund


So what would you call jpeg? Or mpeg?

I am sure you know they answer.
So you don't have to ask.
I call it just jpeg and Mpech which means ( pech ) bad luck.

Edmund