bear wrote:
Steven Sullivan wrote:
bear wrote:
Arny Krueger wrote:
"bear" wrote in message
Arny Krueger wrote:
"bear" wrote in message
Put it another way, IF the distortions present are of a
snipressing the problem of false positives.
We can agree then that there are no tests that actually
take into account this issue, therefore all tests thus
far are suspect in terms of the significance of the test
results?
Not at all. In fact there is an international standard, ITU BS 1116, that
specifically addresses this situation.
http://www.itu.int/rec/R-REC-BS.1116/en
Available only by subscription or purchase.
specifically, it costs a whopping $20.26 to download.
___
-S
"Hey pip squeak, who's L Ron, some new rapper?" -- Nic
Since no one wants to state what it actually says in the sections where it
applies to this discussion, I'll presume it says nothing that is dispositive.
I don't know what it says, as I don't own a copy. Then again, I'm not
the one insisting that what it says, needs to be posted here.
Doubt that I will spend hard earned money to download a document that is of
questionable value, and certainly not to merely debate here on rahe.
So, you've determined the value of an ITU recommendation, without knowing
what it is. That talent must come in handy.
Feel free to excerpt key sections - it's legal.
Feel free to spend a whopping $20 to satisfy your persistent curiousity.
That's legal too. Btw, what do you spend each month for Usenet access?
___
-S
"Hey pip squeak, who's L Ron, some new rapper?" -- Nic