1994-12-02 - Re: recent voice over data

Header Data

From: eric@remailer.net (Eric Hughes)
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 3bcd8aead131faf594b75443ea0ec528fdb3c2ae2729267fcf2b45695fae2d8c
Message ID: <199412020157.RAA14321@largo.remailer.net>
Reply To: <9412012302.AA02541@pig.die.com>
UTC Datetime: 1994-12-02 00:58:36 UTC
Raw Date: Thu, 1 Dec 94 16:58:36 PST

Raw message

From: eric@remailer.net (Eric Hughes)
Date: Thu, 1 Dec 94 16:58:36 PST
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: recent voice over data
In-Reply-To: <9412012302.AA02541@pig.die.com>
Message-ID: <199412020157.RAA14321@largo.remailer.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


   From: "Dave Emery" <die@pig.die.com>

	   I can't quite see how this would work unless the voice was run
   at a very low level relative to the data.  

I believe there are also maximum rates on the data when used with
voice (4.8 kbps?) and the modulation doesn't use echo cancellation.

With the lower bit rate you can get away with a lot, particularly with
modern DSP's.

Eric

Thread

• Return to December 1994

• Return to ““Dave Emery” <die@pig.die.com>”
• Return to “eric@remailer.net (Eric Hughes)”
• Return to “Geoffrey Faivre-Malloy <geoffrey@crl.com>”

• Return to “rishab@dxm.ernet.in”

• 1994-12-01 (Thu, 1 Dec 94 12:06:02 PST) - Eric go ahead; Cpunks start Cpunking again - rishab@dxm.ernet.in
  • 1994-12-01 (Thu, 1 Dec 94 12:48:08 PST) - Re: Eric go ahead; Cpunks start Cpunking again - Geoffrey Faivre-Malloy <geoffrey@crl.com>
  • 1994-12-01 (Thu, 1 Dec 94 12:52:08 PST) - recent voice over data - eric@remailer.net (Eric Hughes)
    • 1994-12-01 (Thu, 1 Dec 94 15:03:36 PST) - Re: recent voice over data - “Dave Emery” <die@pig.die.com>
      • 1994-12-02 (Thu, 1 Dec 94 16:58:36 PST) - Re: recent voice over data - eric@remailer.net (Eric Hughes)