The high end of video cards today actually consists of one card, the NVidia 8800 GTX (okay, Ultra, but that's really BS) for generally over $500. The Ultra is over $600, but it really is a load of crap, they barely even overclocked the GTX to call it that.
ATI (erm...AMD) decided to not release a card on that level, feeling that the "mid-range" cards at around $400 were more price effective for them.
As far as I know, you're correct. In my own experience, the higher frequencies are where all of the distortion (aliasing? I'm not a pro, obviously) can be heard, and if you cut them off, you wouldn't be able to hear it. Thus, the statement contradicts itself. Still, this whole article is horribly unscientific and sounds as though they tried way to hard to sound professional...and failed.
Whether something is "chemically inert" has no correlation to the placebo effect. It is merely a way to TEST for the placebo effect. The placebo effect is simply the idea that if you think something will happen if you do something, it probably will happen, simply because your mind makes it happen. This is especially apparent in such things as headaches, where the brain can very easily convince itself that it feels pain that isn't there. Thus, you think eating (drinking) Splenda will give you headaches, so it does. People that DON'T have this idea in their head generally do NOT notice any sort of correlation between Splenda and headaches. None of this is scientific experiment, and I am not going to take a position on whether or not I personally think that these chemicals cause headaches; I'm merely explaining what the placebo effect is.
Slashdot Mirror
Don't know if you did it on purpose, but that sounds exactly like Jane from Orson Scott Card's Speaker for the Dead (and two sequels)
The high end of video cards today actually consists of one card, the NVidia 8800 GTX (okay, Ultra, but that's really BS) for generally over $500. The Ultra is over $600, but it really is a load of crap, they barely even overclocked the GTX to call it that.
ATI (erm...AMD) decided to not release a card on that level, feeling that the "mid-range" cards at around $400 were more price effective for them.
Real paper is digital? Cool! I never knew that.
I wonder why Sony keeps trying to develop it, then, if it's already out?
As far as I know, you're correct. In my own experience, the higher frequencies are where all of the distortion (aliasing? I'm not a pro, obviously) can be heard, and if you cut them off, you wouldn't be able to hear it. Thus, the statement contradicts itself. Still, this whole article is horribly unscientific and sounds as though they tried way to hard to sound professional...and failed.
Whether something is "chemically inert" has no correlation to the placebo effect. It is merely a way to TEST for the placebo effect. The placebo effect is simply the idea that if you think something will happen if you do something, it probably will happen, simply because your mind makes it happen. This is especially apparent in such things as headaches, where the brain can very easily convince itself that it feels pain that isn't there. Thus, you think eating (drinking) Splenda will give you headaches, so it does. People that DON'T have this idea in their head generally do NOT notice any sort of correlation between Splenda and headaches.
None of this is scientific experiment, and I am not going to take a position on whether or not I personally think that these chemicals cause headaches; I'm merely explaining what the placebo effect is.