I can confirm this. I recently went into the future (simple: I just travelled at.99c for 2 years - the hard part was getting back again). This was happening as a daily occurence, just as you describe. It was fantastic. I spent 30 years in the future collecting all the albums I ever wanted to own (full precision, too - none of this MP3 crap) and writing a fantastic book about the whole experience. It was great.
Unfortunately, my girlfriend dropped my holocube into a cup of tea, thinking it was a sugarcube, and I lost the lot.
A lot of people are asking why we don't have this technology yet.
One possible answer is because of the sensitivity of holographic equipment to vibrations. A hologram encodes phase differences between laser beams. Errors in the phase encoding mean errors in the data retrieval - you get a blurry or disjoint hologram, or you lose your data.
Light is in the hundreds of nanometers range of wavelength. This means a vibration in the equipment (a movement of one part relative to another) of only a tenth of a micron can completely throw the phase encoding out of alignment. Imagine a tape deck whose heads needed positioning to submicron precision.
Making holographic images is therefore rather difficult if, say, a large lorry rolls past your window. A hard-drive with the same problem would be absolutely useless.
So until a suitably hard substrate can be found on which to engineer this equipment, it's only a pipedream. Maybe nanotechnology will create such a material... I doubt it'll happen before then.
This is nonsense. The Red-book standard specifies 0-20kHz bandpass. The 20-22.5 range is not used. This gives a 5kHz band over the Nyquist frequency in which the sampling filters and the resampling filters are allowed to drop from 0.0dB to -96.0dB.
There is NO SUCH THING as a perfect filter. Every filter has a dropoff curve. The Redbook standard is designed with this in mind.
Now, a CHEAP CD player has (a) a lot of passband ripple (b) non-linear phase and (c) leakthrough of aliasing noise. A really cheap CD mastering system probably has the same pitfalls. But a perfect CD player (which doesn't exist) reading a perfect CD (which doesn't exist) made on a perfect mastering system (which doesn't exist) still outputs no frequencies greater than 20kHz.
Us means "you and I", but you're missing the point. The original poster was giving it the "the net was never intended for kids" and I was taking this stupid argument to its logical conclusion. Sorry you missed that.
The net was never intended for eCommerce, nor for lame home pages, nor for day trading, nor for Slashdot... in fact it was never intended for us at all.
Most of my Windows experience is either games (WIN32 to a minimum, plus DirectX) and high-performance graphics applications (MFC to a maximum, plus DirectX).
If I ever engaged in "routine software development" I'd probably learn VB.
Doesn't Occam's Razor force you to select the simplest hypothesis that fits the facts? That must help cut down from the theoretically infinite number of hypotheses.
Interesting post... I've done a huge amount of reverse-engineering myself, mainly of games: Manic Miner, Jet Set Willy, Airball, Wolf 3D, DOOM, Grand Theft Auto are all games I've reverse-engineered the file formats for. I typically don't bother with the scientific method for those, since I have no experimental apparatus (effectively, I had the files and only the files - no file editor, and no file interpreter, since the hacks were done on machines which didn't [yet] have ports of those games). I find that with experience you can guess the large-scale structure, then the small-scale structure is the hard part... the hardest reversing I ever did was the runlength-compressed sprites in Wolf 3D. That took a couple of weeks... but it was well worth it!;)
Arguments which end "either THIS or THIS but not BOTH so WHICH IS IT" are usually fallacious. This one is no exception.
There's no law against reverse-engineering software and rewriting it, just as there's no law against reverse-engineering hardware and redesigning it. It's simple. Copying hardware is just as illegal as copying software. If I were to take the back of a device, copy the PCB and populate it with the same components, it would be illegal.
It's the difference between COPYING and REVERSE-ENGINEERING.
You can't say Adams is a petty dick on the basis of that answer, although you would have thought he'd have read *something* by the guy.
If I was Adams, I'd have said "Yeah, Pratchett's the guy who totally plagiarised all my jokes and my entire style and made a lot of money doing it." Because, face it, that's who Pratchett is.
So don't use DDX/DDV. That aspect of MFC isn't too good, but you are free to ignore it. MFC simply wraps the WIN32 API. All my MFC dialog boxes use ad-hoc message passing mechanisms. DDX/DDV is for HUGE enterprise-level applications, not for tinkering.
Yet again I find myself saying: if you want to program Windows, learn the APIs. MFC isn't a substitute for WIN32 know-how.
Try reading some of the excellent MFC books out there; "Programming Windows 95 using MFC" springs to mind. If your SDI program is properly written, it is a 2-line change to make it an MDI application. Trust me, I have done it. You just have to know MFC : most people who moan about MFC being hard are just lazy fuckers who think MFC means the Wizard writes the program for you. If you don't take the time to understand the Wizard's code, you're asking for trouble.
But, really, this is like asking how do you change a single-threaded program into a multi-threaded program. If you designed it with multi-threading as a possible future, it's zero work : just add locks where your dummy locks are. If you slacked and never considered the need to lock your data, you've got a ton of work ahead.
Your comments on academia are astute, but you fall into the same trap of associating the flaws of academic research with intrinsic flaws in AI. This is logically and semantically incorrect.
It is also logically impossible for you to comment upon what I know in my heart, for we have never met nor discussed anything before (as far as I know).
These are purely linguistic arguments. Your beliefs about AI are more or less irrelevant.
OK, so this software doesn't work. That's no reason for Slashdot to pejoratively speak of "the fraudulent nature of image-filtering AI".
AI is a research subject, and it might be tomorrow that a team comes up with an algorithm which reliably detects pornography (say, with a 99% success rate). The point is, "image-filtering AI" is not inherently fraudulent. The company making wild claims about software that doesn't work is.
Quite how the supposedly intelligent editorial of Slashdot can make such a simple and fatal semantic error is beyond me. These guys need meta-editorializing. They want to say "company bad" and instead they say "science bad".
Last I heard the nanotech genie was still in the bottle. Nanotech DOES NOT EXIST. The technology to create it is expensive and highly advanced. You think that will be hard to regulate?
Saturn emulator for PSX2? So I can play all those great Saturn games? Yes, please!;) Who needs Tekken Tag Tournament when you've got... er... oh, remind me of the name of a Saturn game, will you?;)
Only one of us is sticking up for his favorite brand name. I'm merely commenting on Sega's lack of spark, which is quite apparent. This announcement from Sega is quite obviously a knee-jerk reaction to last week's Sony announcement.
It's dangerous territory that. I recall a special relativity question from University on this. Sustaining an acceleration of 1G over a year you reach a sizable proportion of the speed of light. You can travel what - from the Earth - is several light years and do it in what - from the craft - is about one year.
Thus, the speed of light is not quite the insurmountable barrier it appears to be. However, when you return home, you find civilization in ruins (due to the widespread distribution of free MP3s, no doubt;)
Probably not going to happen during a trip to Mars, but you could probably be several days out of whack. Now that's what I call jet-lag!
Slashdot Mirror
You can already fit every piece of music ever written into a few gigs
Unfortunately, my girlfriend dropped my holocube into a cup of tea, thinking it was a sugarcube, and I lost the lot.
One possible answer is because of the sensitivity of holographic equipment to vibrations. A hologram encodes phase differences between laser beams. Errors in the phase encoding mean errors in the data retrieval - you get a blurry or disjoint hologram, or you lose your data.
Light is in the hundreds of nanometers range of wavelength. This means a vibration in the equipment (a movement of one part relative to another) of only a tenth of a micron can completely throw the phase encoding out of alignment. Imagine a tape deck whose heads needed positioning to submicron precision.
Making holographic images is therefore rather difficult if, say, a large lorry rolls past your window. A hard-drive with the same problem would be absolutely useless.
So until a suitably hard substrate can be found on which to engineer this equipment, it's only a pipedream. Maybe nanotechnology will create such a material ... I doubt it'll happen before then.
Free Software is a political ideal, not an ethical one.
You've obviously never smoked hash. But at least you listened to those nice DARE people at highschool.
First, they look for sequences of frequencies in harmonic relationships, and measure their relative amplitudes and phases.
Second, they extrapolate the curve this produces all the way to 20kHz.
Third, they resynthesize the missing harmonics.
It's a piece of piss really.
There is NO SUCH THING as a perfect filter. Every filter has a dropoff curve. The Redbook standard is designed with this in mind.
Now, a CHEAP CD player has (a) a lot of passband ripple (b) non-linear phase and (c) leakthrough of aliasing noise. A really cheap CD mastering system probably has the same pitfalls. But a perfect CD player (which doesn't exist) reading a perfect CD (which doesn't exist) made on a perfect mastering system (which doesn't exist) still outputs no frequencies greater than 20kHz.
Sorry to be pedantic, but there it is.
Yes please!
Us means "you and I", but you're missing the point. The original poster was giving it the "the net was never intended for kids" and I was taking this stupid argument to its logical conclusion. Sorry you missed that.
The net was never intended for eCommerce, nor for lame home pages, nor for day trading, nor for Slashdot ... in fact it was never intended for us at all.
If I ever engaged in "routine software development" I'd probably learn VB.
If you've got it, you don't WANT an back-slapping Oscar.
Interesting post ... I've done a huge amount of reverse-engineering myself, mainly of games: Manic Miner, Jet Set Willy, Airball, Wolf 3D, DOOM, Grand Theft Auto are all games I've reverse-engineered the file formats for. I typically don't bother with the scientific method for those, since I have no experimental apparatus (effectively, I had the files and only the files - no file editor, and no file interpreter, since the hacks were done on machines which didn't [yet] have ports of those games). I find that with experience you can guess the large-scale structure, then the small-scale structure is the hard part ... the hardest reversing I ever did was the runlength-compressed sprites in Wolf 3D. That took a couple of weeks ... but it was well worth it! ;)
There's no law against reverse-engineering software and rewriting it, just as there's no law against reverse-engineering hardware and redesigning it. It's simple. Copying hardware is just as illegal as copying software. If I were to take the back of a device, copy the PCB and populate it with the same components, it would be illegal.
It's the difference between COPYING and REVERSE-ENGINEERING.
If I was Adams, I'd have said "Yeah, Pratchett's the guy who totally plagiarised all my jokes and my entire style and made a lot of money doing it." Because, face it, that's who Pratchett is.
Yet again I find myself saying: if you want to program Windows, learn the APIs. MFC isn't a substitute for WIN32 know-how.
But, really, this is like asking how do you change a single-threaded program into a multi-threaded program. If you designed it with multi-threading as a possible future, it's zero work : just add locks where your dummy locks are. If you slacked and never considered the need to lock your data, you've got a ton of work ahead.
It is also logically impossible for you to comment upon what I know in my heart, for we have never met nor discussed anything before (as far as I know).
These are purely linguistic arguments. Your beliefs about AI are more or less irrelevant.
AI is a research subject, and it might be tomorrow that a team comes up with an algorithm which reliably detects pornography (say, with a 99% success rate). The point is, "image-filtering AI" is not inherently fraudulent. The company making wild claims about software that doesn't work is.
Quite how the supposedly intelligent editorial of Slashdot can make such a simple and fatal semantic error is beyond me. These guys need meta-editorializing. They want to say "company bad" and instead they say "science bad".
People had no scruples at any point during the last two thousand years, so what else is new?
Last I heard the nanotech genie was still in the bottle. Nanotech DOES NOT EXIST. The technology to create it is expensive and highly advanced. You think that will be hard to regulate?
Only one of us is sticking up for his favorite brand name. I'm merely commenting on Sega's lack of spark, which is quite apparent. This announcement from Sega is quite obviously a knee-jerk reaction to last week's Sony announcement.
If, by "think ahead", you mean "copy Sony" then you're right. First Sega "compete" with Sony by offering Playstation ONE emulation, now this.
If Sony's president announced a moon-shot I'm sure Sega would follow suit (and the analogy I'm drawing deserves some thought ...)
Thus, the speed of light is not quite the insurmountable barrier it appears to be. However, when you return home, you find civilization in ruins (due to the widespread distribution of free MP3s, no doubt ;)
Probably not going to happen during a trip to Mars, but you could probably be several days out of whack. Now that's what I call jet-lag!
Hell, I cheated like a trooper. I even added my own private cheat codes