Your video, SHANNON YOUR PIZZA IS HEREEEEEE!!!, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

My universe is still a happy one to know Richard Moll (Bull Shannon) is still shuffling around.

My hat is well and truly off to Shannon Sharpe.

Never heard of the guy before watching this, but who knew sports pundits could be so eloquent and thoughtful?

OTOH, I find America's hyper-patriotism deeply weird.

Don't get me wrong, I love both my country of birth and my adopted home, but that's because of the people that live there and the places I've been to. The idea that someone who has a problem with some serious issues in a country is not a patriot is just alien to me.

"I love America more than any other country in this world, and, exactly for this reason, I insist on the right to criticize her perpetually."
- James A. Baldwin

Your video, Shannon Sharpe on Trump, NFL and Protest, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Jon Hamm, Kristen Wiig, Amy Poehler, Paul Rudd, Molly Shannon, Elizabeth Banks, Michael Ian Black, Bradley Cooper, John Slattery, Judah Friedlander, Janeane Garofalo, Joe Lo Truglio, Ken Marino, Christopher Meloni, Marguerite Moreau, Zak Orth, David Hyde Pierce, and Michael Showalter.

That is a lot of funny people

Lets go to an easier access method shall we?
Wikipedia explains pretty cleanly what the Shannon-Hartley theorem is;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shannon%E2%80%93Hartley_theorem

It relates to how much information you can transmit in any system, given a signal value, a noise value, and an available bandwidth for information in that system (sound spectrum, light spectrum, electrical RF spectrum etc.)

// DELVE DEEPER:
Curious? Read Andrew Lih's quick explanation of Information Theory
Even more interested? Spend an hour learning Information Theory with this Cambridge Professor
Super interested? Read "Information: a history, a theory, a flood" by James Glieck
A maths person? Read Shannon's original 1948 paper which changed the world.

You are thinking about QAM, Quadrature Amplitude Modulation. Thats an interesting question because QAM essentially produces the same results that the prof talks about in this video. By using interesting ways to change the beat and phase of a single carrier, one can represent a whole array of numbers greater than just a 1 or a zero with a single pulse, case in point.

In QAM, lets just use the easy example of QAM, QPSK (4QAM), where there are 4 possible binary positions for any given 'carrier' signal at a known frequency.

By shifting both phase and amplitude, you can get a 0, 1, 2 or 3, where each position represents a power of 2, up to a total value of 16 unique numbers.

Rather than just a 0 or a 1, you can have 0 through to 15. However doing this requires both a timeslot, and a known carrier window.

The fastest the QAM transmitter can encode onto a carrier is limited by the nyquist rate, that is, less than half the frequency which the receiver can sample at its fastest rate (on the remote end). As you increase the speed of the encoding, you also increase the error rate, and introduce more noise into the base carrier signal, in turn, reducing your effective available bandwidth.

So it then becomes a balancing act, do I want to encode faster, or do I want to increase my constellation density? The obvious answer is the one we went with, increase in constellation density.

There are much more dense variants, I think the highest ive heard of was 1024 QAM, where a single carrier of 8MHz wide could represent 1024 bits (1,050,625 unique values for a given 'pulse' within a carrier).

I actually had a lot more typed out here, but the maths that goes into this gets very ugly, and you have to account for noise products that are introduced as you increase both your transmission speed, and your receiver sensitivty, thus lowering your SNR, reducing your effective bandwidth for a given QAM scheme.

So rather than bore you with the details, the Shannon Hartley theorem is the hard wired physical limitation.

Think of it as an asymptote, that QAM is one method of trying to milk the available space of.

You can send encoded pulses very fast, but you are limited by nyquist, and your receivers ability to determine noise from signal.

The faster you encode, the more noise, the less effective bandwidth....and so begins the ritule of increasing constellation density, and receivers that can decode them....etc....

There is also the aspect of having carriers too close to one another that you must consider. If you do not have enough of a dead band between your receivers cut off for top end, and the NEXT carrier alongs cutoff for deadband at its LOW end, you can induce what is known as a heterodyne. These are nasty, especially so when talking about fibre, as the wavelengths used can cause a WIDE BAND noise product that results in your effective RF noise floor to jump SUBSTANTIALLY, destroying your entire network in the process.

So not only can you not have a contiguous RF bandwidth of carriers, one directly after another...if you try and get them close, you end up ruining everyones day.

I am sure there will be newer more fancy ways to fill that spectrum with useable numbers, but I seriously doubt they will ever go faster than the limit I proposed earlier (unless they can get better SNR, again that was just a stab in the dark).

It gives you a good idea of how it works though.

If you want to read more on this, I suggest checking wikipedia for the following;

Shannon Hartley theorem.
Nyquist Rate
Quadrature Phase Shift Key
Quadrature Amplitude Modulation
Fibre Optic Communication Wavelengths
Stimulated Brillouin Scattering
Ebrium Doped Fibre Amplifiers

Fibre can go a pretty long distance before it affects the signal though...

Fibre is comprised mainly of silicone, the more pure the fibre, the less dispersion issues occur at or around 1550nm (one of the main wavelengths used for long distance transmission, as we can easily and cheaply amplify this using ebrium doped segments and some pumps!)

Any impurities in the fibre will absorb the 1550 at a greater rate than other wavelengths, causing linear distortions in the received carrier along greater distances. This is called Brillouin scattering.

In the context of the above video, consider a paralell cable sending data over 100m. If one of those lines is 98m, then every bit that is sent down that line, will be out of order.

Same deal with Brillouin scattering, only on the optical level. Thats one of the main issues we gotta deal with at distance, however it only ever occurs at or around 1550nm, and only ever when you are driving that carrier at high powers (i.e. launching into the fibre directy from an ebrium doped amplifier at +15 dBm)

Theres some fancy ways of getting around that, but its not cheap.

Anywhere from say around 1260 to 1675nm is the typical bandwidth window we use today.

So, say 415nm of available bandwidth.
If we want that in frequency to figure out the theoritcal bits/sec value from the shannon-hartley theory, then we just take the inverse of the wavelength and times it by the speed of light.

7.2239e+14 hz is the available spectrum.

...thats 7.2239e+5 terahertz....

Assume typical signal to noise on fibre carrier of +6dB (haha, not a chance in hell it would be this good across this much bandwidth, but whatever..)

For a single fibre you would be looking at an average peak bandwidth of around 20280051221451.9 mbps.

Thats 19,340,564 Terabits per second, or 18,887.3 Petabits per second.

You can fudge that +/- a couple of million Tbps based on what the actual SnR would be, but thats your average figure.....thats a lot of Terabits.

On one fibre.

Source: Im a telecoms engineer

*promote Great show! I still have a Bull Shannon puppet in my collection.

Can you point me towards a comparable situation? I can't recall a situation where he was making an emotional plea about an important topic and was ripped for his usual stutter. People like Jon Stewart pick their spots. Comedy is about timing.

I'm not saying you can't get your digs in. I'm saying there's a time and place. Shannon Sharpe's speech impediments and questionable word choice are widely joked about:

http://www.theonion.com/articles/cbs-producers-ask-shannon-sharpe-to-use-at-least-3,7044/

That doesn't bother me. He's plenty self deprecating about his "book smahts." My issue is with context. 99 percent of the time you could crack these jokes in his face and he'd laugh right along with you. If you did it here, he'd rip you in half. The guy grew up dirt ass poor in rural georgia. He made himself a millionaire. What does he need to do for the peanut gallery to shut the fuck up for 2 minutes while he talks about something important? If he was being granted a shred of respect, they would.

This probably requires some background. The details of the story are not totally clear, and won't be pending an investigation. The facts are that Jonathan Martin left the team after what was described as a "breakdown" in the cafeteria. Apparently the team was pranking him by banding together and refusing to sit with him. This is the sort of behavior you see. Afterwards allegations of physical beating and voice mails were revealed that suggested Richie Incognito (I know, ironic name) was the primary perpetrator of the abuses.

Focus has been on the use of the racial epithet in question. Frankly, I think this is a red herring. I, like many of you, don't really care about the use of that word. That said, I think Shannon is correct in stating there are signs of something deeper here. That is, real actual issues of race relations.

You've heard here that Incognito is thought of as an "honorary black" in that locker room. More background is that Jonathan Martin would have been the third generation in his family to graduate from Harvard, but he decided to go to Stanford instead. It's been suggested that Martin was ostracized more for this reason than anything. He just came from a completely different place than most of the other guys playing. At its root, the allegation is that they made him feel uncomfortable for coming from a wealthy black family.

What I find much more upsetting than any epithet is what I interpreted to be a continuation of the sort of attitude Shannon was talking about. By implying he had used an incorrect word rather than emotionally flubbing its pronunciation the implication, to me, is that his intellect is not being respected. Since this clip is most definitely about race, and that is a common stereotype about black men, I couldn't help but wonder if his skin color biased your judgements. That, to me, is much more troubling than throwing around nigger, fag, or kyke with your friends.

In the end, I think this whole story will blow over. It's just as likely to me that Martin was replaced as a starter, and is now trying to lawyer up (call his parents) to cash out his career. We won't know until they look into it. Still, in this context, I was surprised people here of all places would belittle this sort of commentary, and by extension the commentator. It's disrespectful to the message if nothing else. If you don't find discussions of race relations worth being dignified then I guess I think you're kind of a dick even if you aren't a bigot.

There is one thing you have to respect black men for, they can pull of seriously effeminate stuff and still not come across that way at all. If my name was Shannon and I'd wear a pink shirt and a matching bowtie, people's first thought would certainly not be "I bet he plays football", it would be "Who's the gay nerd there?" I don't know why but black guys can pull of the silliest outfits and it never ceases to impress me.
And regarding what he said, he's not only right but also very clear. Nitpicking mispronounciations or misuse of words only detracts from his IMO important message.

Couple of things that stood out most:
Michael Shannon (general Zod) apparently took voice-coaching lessons from Jeff Bridges
Superman was considerably less gay this time, and Lois Lane was soft and smooth and girly (plus Amy Adams has the natural reddish-brown hair of the comic book Lois Lane)

Otherwise the damn thing was preposterous....OH, and the CGI of the attack on the city?? Wholly unbelievable (i.e. the segment when Metropolis is under attack and all the central characters at ground zero miraculously survive).

Your video, Michael Shannon Reads the Insane Delta Gamma Sorority Letter, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.