Slashdot Mirror

HD resolution is about two megapixels (1920 pixels horizontally multiplied by 1080 pixels vertically gives you 2,073,600 pixels). 4K is a little less than nine megapixels.

The Human Eye Is 576 Megapixels

Interestingly, the push for 48 Hz doesn't seem to be going too well -- turns out people like the 24 fps look.

Personally I'm with the majority here and hate the high-fps "video camera" effect. 24fps 70mm film ftw ... :)

He did a previous demonstration of some footage at the 48fps rate at a convention, and it did in fact result in backlash.

http://www.studiodaily.com/2012/04/the-hobbit-the-soap-opera-effect-and-the-48fps-and-faster-future-of-movies/

That's not mind control by a longshot, it's just targeted audio. Advanced versions of this off-the-shelf technology: http://www.studiodaily.com/main/work/8636.html

Mind control is making someone think or believe something that you want. Targeted audio, teams of actors, torture -- all of these are means to achieve the end. So, if one has a device to target audio at a person, so that only they hear things -- one has a tool to make the person believe they are hearing things. This isn't mind control as in "I make you go to the store and buy broccoli", but more of "I make you believe that ___ is happening, and maybe influence you into believing that ___ is a good course of action".

That's not mind control by a longshot, it's just targeted audio. Advanced versions of this off-the-shelf technology: http://www.studiodaily.com/main/work/8636.html

I've seen that video before:
It was commissioned by Harvard by an animation company called XVIVO. See the three-minute version here or here. There's a nice article about this particular animation, and [blatant self-promotion whatever, but to avoid retyping everything]: some other stuff.

Actually I the blog this post links to has some comments on this: it is an educational event...whether or not people like the kind of education. The material was also posted freely, not sold: and I've also seen this video used in my University courses: it's fairly helpful for certain topics in classes such as physiology. Yes, they can claim this to be "educational": lol or not. Other than that the video can be found here: http://www.studiodaily.com/main/searchlist/6850.html Enjoy. : )

According to a random page I found while googling and not caring if it's valid or not, DLP recently has been in the lead among business projectors vs. LCD. See a few paragraphs down

That means the technology will stick around for a while, and I personally prefer the visual quality and price/performance of DLP vs. LCD and plasma. I don't think this bulb life "setback" will kill it since it doesn't have all its baskets in one egg :), eg. TVs.

If I had the money to finish my basement and home theater room right now, DLP would be my choice. And I'm talking home theater projector, not TV. It always bugs me how every few months some company announces it's showcasing the world's largest LCD TV. 80", 90", 100", or 46'. Who cares!?! What donkey goes and buys these things? If you're going to go big, get a high quality projector and a high quality screen, regardless whether it's DLP or LCD.

I was looking for a comment like this so I wouldn't have to write it myself. Just to add to the notes of caution + hope, the research on cell surface receptiors, signalling molecules, and the like, sounds very promising. A couple of months ago, there was a report on the BBC about a different "sugar" molecule that is involved in cell signalling during blood vessel growth. Since tumors can't grow without lots of new blood vessels to supply them, this approach can stop them in their tracks. The trick is getting it to work in live people instead of glass lab dishes.

It's also worth pointing out that these are not your father's sugar molecules. You don't find them in a donut. They don't taste sweet. They're huge molecules, generally complexed with proteins, or at least peptides, and they're as critical for the functioning of cells as traffic lights are to the flow of traffic. (If you want to take a look at just how complex, there's nothing better than John Liebler's (sp?) Life of a Cell made for Harvard. It's a flash 8 or above animation.) What this research is trying to find is a way to give cancer cells a turn signal, as it were, and shunt them down a side street to the town dump.

http://www.studiodaily.com/main/technique/tproject s/6850.html

This is just a press release. How did this get in? Oh, right.

As usual, Roland the Plogger posts the link he's paid to post. Here's a better story about the animation.

The animation itself is nice (and you can see it from the link above), but it has that MTV/Discovery Channel style of too many short segments. There's a musical background, but no explaination of what you're looking at.

It also gives the incorrect impression that some of the self-assembly processes shown are much more organized than they really are. Watching those tubes self-assemble makes it look as if all the molecules have active guidance and propulsion. In reality, self-assembly just means that when the right molecules in the right orientation happen to bump, they stick.