Slashdot Mirror

Some database somewhere:

- http://dictionairy.com/
- Accorddingly
- insufficient
- electrolisis
- dyode
- http://funnylink.com/
- [Random business address]
- Hey I'm back from vacation, what's up guys?
- xnYZ36A
- In a world savaged by insecurity one man is standing up to stop it.
- Eva Longoria
- ASDF
- http://business.link.com/

I'm quivering in my boots as I write it. My god! They know everything!

Jeez, how is this any better than digg if the so called "editors" can't edit for shit? And to make it worse, assholes mark you as a troll if they don't like what you write, even if it is a perfectly valid point of view, permanently fucking your account up the ass and stopping you from ever getting into a valid discussion. I'm gonna go ahead and go back to digging, fuck you guys. Cya. Go ahead and mark me a troll, my karma is already "terrible". What a crappy system. Also it's slow. Digg gets stories fucking weeks before this shit. Cya.

> Basically, with a visor, you're staring at a screen a few inches
> from your nose for a protacted period of time. Focusing on that is
> not fun;

I work in flight simulation - we have VERY good VR helmets. The light fed into your eyes is 'collimated' - meaning that the light rays from the video display are stuffed through some optics so that they emerge as PARALLEL rays of light rather than rays eminating radially outwards from each point on the screen.

Collimating the light is the key to avoiding the problem you describe - and it works perfectly. We also employ big curved display screens that wrap all around your face - so it's not like looking at two tiny squares in front of your face - you can swivel your eyeballs and look to either side, up and down.

You can see our VR helmet at http://www.link.com/ - you can even buy one if you can afford the price of a pretty decent Ferrari.

The only problem with collimated displays it that when something *IS* close to you in the virtual world, it seems that it's too far away - however, because we project a slightly different image into each eye, your brain does a pretty good job of recognising when things are close by noting how much your eyes have to cross to fuse the two images into one.

There was one very small remaining problem - you couldn't see your own nose! You'd be amazed at just how weird that is (unless of course you happen to have lost your nose in some kind of tragic accident!). A small piece of plastic built into the display at a strategic point fixed that nicely.

The display is crisp and bright and each display can be driven by either one PC or an entire render farm to get realtime realism that can be almost arbitarily good.

The helmet can easily incorporate one of any number of head tracker technologies depending on whether or not a magnetically neutral or acoustically reasonable environment is available to allow different kinds of tracker to work accurately.

So - the helmet problem is completely, 100% solved...except for the price.

VR is alive and kicking - it's just that the people who build it and the people who use it don't *call* it "virtual reality".

Flight simulation (complete with helmet-mounted display, head trackers, hand trackers, fancy graphics, etc) *is* virtual reality. The company I work for (L3 Simulation) sells full up systems to the US government by the truckload (literally: http://www.link.com./ Other companies make simulators for a variety of other vehicles using similar techniques.

Where VR has failed is for people who are just walking around in the virtual world - mostly because of the extreme difficulty of coming up with treadmills or whatever that adequately allow you to walk around. (although there have been some brave efforts). So - VR is currently restricted to simulating people flying planes, driving cars or whatever.

link text

Here's a Slashcode hint, since you too seem to suffer from "Dangerously High User ID Syndrome" (also known as 'being a lame n00b').

When you see something like this:

Hey I'm a link! [link.com]

...where the [url] part appears twice, you can bet that nine times out of 10, the commment was reposted by some lazy shitbox viewing the source and copy/pasting, without regard to proper formatting. It's karma-whores who are so preoccupied with their own cocks that they can't even bother to review HTML 101 and properly fool us.

Do we need a link to everything that caught the posters eye ?

link to enough sites in your comments?

Don't you hate news stories where almost every damn word is a link ?

Something's starting to annoy me. When you submit an article and link to a page on another site, you don't have to put the name of the site in a hyperlink. Nearly every person here knows how to get to the main page for the site if they want to, and usually the main page isn't directly relevant to the story.

Sometimes it seems like people link for every word in the article and it's hard to figure out which link is the one with the story.

Something's starting to annoy me. When you submit an article and link to a page on another site, you don't have to put the name of the site in a hyperlink. Nearly every person here knows how to get to the main page for the site if they want to, and usually the main page isn't directly relevant to the story.

Sometimes it seems like people link for every word in the article and it's hard to figure out which link is the one with the story.

They have George Foreman.

"There's a party," she said,
"We'll sing and we'll dance,
It's come as you are."

Gun Owners that use their guns to commit crimes are arrested. Maybe the wording of the charges isn't the same, but its the same basic principle. If you have dynamite and blow up a safe with it, you will be introuble for having it. However if you use it legitimately there is no problem.

P.S. http://not.a.real.link.com is back up...

With enough money, you can buy anyone.

I hear Sun Microsystems just signed a deal with the BSD Devil.