Man isn't part of nature? What makes us so damned special that we're an unnatural force? If nature is a computer and man is a product of nature, then how is man somehow not a force of nature?
DO YOU understand anything the Creationists don't?
We can't do a HUD yet because that requires computer image recognition at a level we don't have yet, and a MUCH higher resolution implant than we have now. The image recognition would have to be almost as good as what our brain normally does - piecing together our 3D world based on the little slice the camera is seeing as it turns and moves, so that it knows where everything is and WHAT everything is, so that it can add the labels as we look at those things.
Implanted HUDs are wrong, wrong, WRONG and that's just all there is to it. A HUD is a bottleneck created by the necessity of presenting information to the human senses: capable of processing visual and auditory stimuli (well, those are the ones that the HUD would be targeted to). The whole purpose of an implant is to bypass the information bottlenecks created by our physical senses; there's no reason to artificially re-impose them. Because as you said, all you're really doing is out-sourcing a whole lot of the brain's existing intelligence - "The image recognition would have to be almost as good as what our brain normally does". Exactly. You're re-inventing the wheel.
The correct approach is to directly wire the extra stimuli to the brain. If we can figure out how to get it the information, it will re-configure itself to process it - we're finding that it's incredibly good at doing that. Once it does that, it will not be some hacked overlay onto one of our existing senses, like a HUD or an audible alarm - it will be a true sixth sense, processed along with all the rest of the information that the brain receives. As the other commenter said, simply adding extra information should be enough; the brain will figure out how to interpret it entirely on its own.
So if you're trying to present the brain a better 3D picture of the world, the correct approach is not to design a computer that does wire-frame meshes on everything. The brain is already extremely good at doing that. The correct approach would be to simply feed it raw data from a rangefinder and let it build up the 3D models on its own.
No, only to people who come off like assholes and idiots, which you did in your original comment.
I'm a great driver. Other people are idiots and assholes. And anytime I want, I'll post your bad driving on Youtube along with your license plate number.
No; obviously you set your display resolution to whatever the external screen's native resolution is, and then you endure whatever scaling artifacts there are while your audience sees it as it is intended to be seen.
There are perfectly good reasons to have more than one vehicle.
For instance:
One gets good gas mileage for in-city driving. One gets decent highway mileage and has enough space to store a few suitcases. One gets poor mileage but has enough space to haul furniture (or kids). One gets poor mileage but is a 4WD vehicle which is mainly for use in the snow.
And it's always nice to have at least two vehicles so you don't have to rent, borrow, or carpool when one of them goes into the shop for repair.
It doesn't matter who's the better shot, it matters who's better in a firefight.
Apples-to-oranges. Shooting a target isn't like being in a firefight, but driving is driving, no matter who it is.
Your analogy would work if you were arguing "It doesn't matter who drives better on the closed track, it matters who's better in traffic." But that's not what you were arguing at all.
Similarly, a non-professional driver might have better reflexes than a professional one but that doesn't necessarily mean "better." Cops are skilled as they need to be;
Real-world experience is real-world experience. And your statement made no sense at all.
The electric turn signal device [...] must not be flashed on one side only on a parked or disabled vehicle [...] However, such signal devices may be flashed simultaneously on both sides of a motor vehicle to indicate the presence of a vehicular traffic hazard requiring unusual care in approaching, overtaking and passing.
That doesn't say you can't drive with the hazard lights on. Furthermore, I don't see anywhere that it says that it is illegal to drive with the hazard lights on, except as described in 625 ILCS 5/11-1420(c):
Operators of vehicles not a part of a funeral procession may not form a procession or convoy and have their headlights or hazard lights or both lighted for the purpose of securing the rightofway granted by this Section to funeral processions.
at the same time they might have had no clue either
When all the real nuclear experts are joining with the armchair nuclear experts and saying "you know, there could very easily be a much bigger problem here than they're admitting to", the people who are actually supposed to be experts who are operating this particular nuclear power plant (and who we're sort of relying on to properly handle the situation and hopefully foresee and deal with its complications) don't really get to use ignorance as an excuse when everyone finds out "hey, apparently things were much worse than they previously admitted to".
I use my cruise on the highway, and I'm not going to speed up for you, nor will I slow down unless I have to. If I'm passing someone who's going 1 mph slower than me, tough.
If you're going the speed limit, fine. Otherwise, you're blocking the flow of traffic. And note that some states have provision for exceeding the speed limit in order to pass, in which case you may be blocking the flow of traffic if you don't.
Yeah, so you double- and triple-check it. But at some point "looks like things have been worse than we'd previously thought" starts to sound suspiciously like "looks like things have been worse than we'd previously admitted".
Fred is 14, and he’s been laying line for five years. Desmarais, who lives in Westmore, has laid line with draft horses for 31 years, and he learned to drive a team on his father’s farm in Barton when he was young. He travels to Amish country in the Midwest at least once a year to appraise new equipment and buy a horse, if one catches his eye–as Fred did one year while Desmarais was in Indiana. Desmarais has four draft horses, another Belgian and two Percherons: a second team lays line for FairPoint elsewhere in the state.
Duke Nukem Forever, the long awaited sequel to 1996's Duke Nukem 3D, has finally "gone gold', meaning that the game's main development has been completed and is now being replicated onto disks for its release for the PC, Xbox 360 and PS3 platforms.
Relative to what they'll eventually admit they were.
Seriously, is anybody else getting sick of this constant down-playing the severity of the situation? I understand the idea that you don't immediately run to the worst-case scenario and cry that the sky's falling, but this is ridiculous.
The first time a customer or manager asks you "can we get it full screen?", centered is no longer an option.
The customers/managers aren't looking at the laptop screen. They're looking at the projected image on the screen behind you.
As for extending the desktop, sure, but then you don't see the same on your screen as on the big screen behind you, which was kind of the point I made two posts ago?
Like I said, PowerPoint displays the same thing in both displays. If you're not using PowerPoint and what you're using can't do that, then yeah, centered or keep-aspect stretch, depending on whether you prefer "big" or "not interpolated and blurry". Personally, my eyes are fine and I prefer "not interpolated and blurry".
Why would I maximize something on a wide-screen display, unless I needed the horizontal space? Show me my desktop icons - most of them are on either the right or left side anyway, where I can get at them.
Slashdot Mirror
LOL. Yeah; if you're not already starting to blister, you do in fact double- and triple-check it because the first reading was obviously false.
3. Define nature.
Everything not man-made.
Man isn't part of nature? What makes us so damned special that we're an unnatural force? If nature is a computer and man is a product of nature, then how is man somehow not a force of nature?
DO YOU understand anything the Creationists don't?
We can't do a HUD yet because that requires computer image recognition at a level we don't have yet, and a MUCH higher resolution implant than we have now. The image recognition would have to be almost as good as what our brain normally does - piecing together our 3D world based on the little slice the camera is seeing as it turns and moves, so that it knows where everything is and WHAT everything is, so that it can add the labels as we look at those things.
Implanted HUDs are wrong, wrong, WRONG and that's just all there is to it. A HUD is a bottleneck created by the necessity of presenting information to the human senses: capable of processing visual and auditory stimuli (well, those are the ones that the HUD would be targeted to). The whole purpose of an implant is to bypass the information bottlenecks created by our physical senses; there's no reason to artificially re-impose them. Because as you said, all you're really doing is out-sourcing a whole lot of the brain's existing intelligence - "The image recognition would have to be almost as good as what our brain normally does". Exactly. You're re-inventing the wheel.
The correct approach is to directly wire the extra stimuli to the brain. If we can figure out how to get it the information, it will re-configure itself to process it - we're finding that it's incredibly good at doing that. Once it does that, it will not be some hacked overlay onto one of our existing senses, like a HUD or an audible alarm - it will be a true sixth sense, processed along with all the rest of the information that the brain receives. As the other commenter said, simply adding extra information should be enough; the brain will figure out how to interpret it entirely on its own.
So if you're trying to present the brain a better 3D picture of the world, the correct approach is not to design a computer that does wire-frame meshes on everything. The brain is already extremely good at doing that. The correct approach would be to simply feed it raw data from a rangefinder and let it build up the 3D models on its own.
Name me one laptop that allows you to set 1920x1080 on the laptop display if it isn't its native resolution.
If the laptop's display is larger than that, it should. Otherwise, your only option might be to extend the desktop.
Dunno if you are normally an asshole or a troll
No, only to people who come off like assholes and idiots, which you did in your original comment.
I'm a great driver. Other people are idiots and assholes. And anytime I want, I'll post your bad driving on Youtube along with your license plate number.
Upgrades are painful.
Zydrate comes in a little glass vial...
No; obviously you set your display resolution to whatever the external screen's native resolution is, and then you endure whatever scaling artifacts there are while your audience sees it as it is intended to be seen.
1. Is the containment vessel solid? Will this burn through?
If the answer to that is "no, yes", then it isn't a containment vessel.
2. If the melted fuel gets hot enough to burn you will get radioactive smoke, and such into the air.
If it's exposed to oxygen, or the air, it isn't in a containment vessel, or you blew it open by putting water in.
3. You are reducing the shielding to nearby people, by removing water that would be in the way.
The water is not for shielding. The water is for cooling.
I'd love to see someone who could drive 70 km on a 50 km road. How many parsecs could they do the Kessel run in, I wonder?
There are perfectly good reasons to have more than one vehicle.
For instance:
One gets good gas mileage for in-city driving.
One gets decent highway mileage and has enough space to store a few suitcases.
One gets poor mileage but has enough space to haul furniture (or kids).
One gets poor mileage but is a 4WD vehicle which is mainly for use in the snow.
And it's always nice to have at least two vehicles so you don't have to rent, borrow, or carpool when one of them goes into the shop for repair.
It doesn't matter who's the better shot, it matters who's better in a firefight.
Apples-to-oranges. Shooting a target isn't like being in a firefight, but driving is driving, no matter who it is.
Your analogy would work if you were arguing "It doesn't matter who drives better on the closed track, it matters who's better in traffic." But that's not what you were arguing at all.
Similarly, a non-professional driver might have better reflexes than a professional one but that doesn't necessarily mean "better." Cops are skilled as they need to be;
Real-world experience is real-world experience. And your statement made no sense at all.
Citation?
625 ILCS 5/11-804(d):
The electric turn signal device [...] must not be flashed on one side only on a parked or disabled vehicle [...] However, such signal devices may be flashed simultaneously on both sides of a motor vehicle to indicate the presence of a vehicular traffic hazard requiring unusual care in approaching, overtaking and passing.
That doesn't say you can't drive with the hazard lights on. Furthermore, I don't see anywhere that it says that it is illegal to drive with the hazard lights on, except as described in 625 ILCS 5/11-1420(c):
Operators of vehicles not a part of a funeral procession may not form a procession or convoy and have their headlights or hazard lights or both lighted for the purpose of securing the rightofway granted by this Section to funeral processions.
WHY does chrome have to de-nest the entire conversation before i can comment?
That is not a Chrome-specific bug. Slashdot is borken and has been for weeks.
at the same time they might have had no clue either
When all the real nuclear experts are joining with the armchair nuclear experts and saying "you know, there could very easily be a much bigger problem here than they're admitting to", the people who are actually supposed to be experts who are operating this particular nuclear power plant (and who we're sort of relying on to properly handle the situation and hopefully foresee and deal with its complications) don't really get to use ignorance as an excuse when everyone finds out "hey, apparently things were much worse than they previously admitted to".
I use my cruise on the highway, and I'm not going to speed up for you, nor will I slow down unless I have to. If I'm passing someone who's going 1 mph slower than me, tough.
If you're going the speed limit, fine. Otherwise, you're blocking the flow of traffic. And note that some states have provision for exceeding the speed limit in order to pass, in which case you may be blocking the flow of traffic if you don't.
Yeah, so you double- and triple-check it. But at some point "looks like things have been worse than we'd previously thought" starts to sound suspiciously like "looks like things have been worse than we'd previously admitted".
No.
Fred is 14, and he’s been laying line for five years. Desmarais, who lives in Westmore, has laid line with draft horses for 31 years, and he learned to drive a team on his father’s farm in Barton when he was young. He travels to Amish country in the Midwest at least once a year to appraise new equipment and buy a horse, if one catches his eye–as Fred did one year while Desmarais was in Indiana. Desmarais has four draft horses, another Belgian and two Percherons: a second team lays line for FairPoint elsewhere in the state.
Not in this context. From TFA:
Duke Nukem Forever, the long awaited sequel to 1996's Duke Nukem 3D, has finally "gone gold', meaning that the game's main development has been completed and is now being replicated onto disks for its release for the PC, Xbox 360 and PS3 platforms.
Relative to what they'll eventually admit they were.
Seriously, is anybody else getting sick of this constant down-playing the severity of the situation? I understand the idea that you don't immediately run to the worst-case scenario and cry that the sky's falling, but this is ridiculous.
Oh yeah? Well, I read it as trucker. Made me reconsider all those comments I've noticed scrawled on truck-stop bathrooms...
Oh, so are you one of those morons who tries to merge from the 45 MPH ramp onto the 55 MPH highway while you're still going 45 MPH?
The first time a customer or manager asks you "can we get it full screen?", centered is no longer an option.
The customers/managers aren't looking at the laptop screen. They're looking at the projected image on the screen behind you.
As for extending the desktop, sure, but then you don't see the same on your screen as on the big screen behind you, which was kind of the point I made two posts ago?
Like I said, PowerPoint displays the same thing in both displays. If you're not using PowerPoint and what you're using can't do that, then yeah, centered or keep-aspect stretch, depending on whether you prefer "big" or "not interpolated and blurry". Personally, my eyes are fine and I prefer "not interpolated and blurry".
What if I'm going 85 in a 65 zone. Do I still need to move out of the way of the guy wanting to go 90?
Yes.
What's the upper limit here? Am I still a holier than thou slowpoke if I'm at 100 mph and you are behind me wanting to go 105?
Regardless, you shouldn't want to be tailgated by someone who's going that fast anyway. Move over and let them pass as soon as you can safely do so.
Why would I maximize something on a wide-screen display, unless I needed the horizontal space? Show me my desktop icons - most of them are on either the right or left side anyway, where I can get at them.
You were doing 45 in a 55?
That is 18% below the posted speed limit, and probably closer to 25% below the actual prevailing speed.
You are not a "good" driver. You are a DANGEROUS driver.