That's what the hype claims. Problem is, all of that means you need to get more data into and out off the CPU, and that means less bandwidth for other stuff.
And I have yet to see a CPU that can handle sound processing better than a DSP. That's what they are for.
I believe his point was that you first move in to a 3D scene created from one picture (not impossible but requires human interaction), then rotate and zoom on an object not visible in the first image (naturally impossible) and finally sharpening it to see details not existing previously.
The is one resource for information on Bluetooth compatability and that is the list of qualified products on the Bluetooth.org qualification program site. (It's a bitch to find via links though.) One search and then a click on the "details" will tell you exactly which profiles that device is qualified for. If you have multiple devices, just check that they match up wrt profiles and you are good to go.
Why they don't advertice that list to help consumers is beyond me. (Probably because it's a lot of work to figure out.) BTW you should look for devices which support the Sync profile. Some devices (eg Nokia) implement their own sync system on top of serial port profile instead, that works too but it's not as "clean" and requires special PC software.
On topics of phones I'd ignore the ringtones part, just don't use annoying ringtones. (Mine is always set to silent.) Personally I like Sony-Ericsson phones, but that's just me. (They tend to work well with Bluetooth as well.)
Many newer phones support Java MIDP (J2ME) which might be fun if you like programming and want to add a little to your own phone.
I only works in the way that it installs programs on OSX. It doesn't solve the problems inherent for GNU/Linux.
In order to make it work on GNU/Linux you'd need to have all standard libraries installed per default or just include everything as "dll's" in the application package.
The reason it works for OSX is because OSX is an extremely controlled platform which allows them to make assumptions that are not valid on GNU/Linux. OSX doesn't even run on more than one plaform (at least not with end users who do the installing) or anything but special built hardware. Of course it works without a hitch, they'd had to be the worst designers in the world not to make it work!
It really depends on how the added data is stored there. If it is stored in a fasion which makes it possible for others to figure out what it means then that's one thing. If they put encrypted data there then that is another thing.
There is also a risk that the camera manufacturers just dump all meta data into a "private" area for no real good reason. Apparently meta data is often obfuscated in RAW files, this includes things like white balance and such things. Hardly something that is very specific to the camera but they do it because they can or just because they can't be bothered to do it right.
So the danger with DNG is that we move to a format where all the RAW files from cameras have to format.DNG but besides that not much changes from the current situation.
Personally I think the most important thing is to make professional photographers aware of the situation. There was an article about the OpenRAW project on Luminous-Landscapes but it didn't cause much stir in the cummunities I look. (Eg fredmiranda.com which has a lot of good amateurs and pros.)
Unfortunately DNG doesn't go all the way and just moves the problem further down the line. From the OpenRAW FAQ:
DNG also allows "private data" to be stored in the DNG file. This private data is only known to the camera company that wrote the private data. Third party software that reads and/or writes DNG files will ignore private data recorded by the camera. Only the software written by the camera maker will read the private data written to the DNG file by its camera. Some of this private data might be important or useful information needed by a RAW converter. Adobe's DNG format does not eliminate the problem of undocumented RAW files but transfers the problem into another "container", the DNG file. By allowing private (undocumented) data in the DNG file, DNG does not meet OpenRAW's goals.
So in the end you end up with a similar situation. You can read the data but you don't know exactly how to treat it.
Oh you mean you'd rather use propriatary film with propriatary developer chemicals? There is nothing particularly "open" about that besides that the chemicals are available to buy in most photography stores. If they go out you will no longer be able to develop your old exposed film.
Just to be clear, RAW is like the undeveloped exposed negative. After "developing" it to a TIFF16 or whatever format you want to have. You might think that RAW is equivalent to the undeveloped negative, but it really isn't.
Besides, there is always DCRAW which allows you to "develop" your RAW files in an OSS fasion.
Furthermore the reason RAW formats vary between makers is because it is raw data from the CCD/CMOS. So it's not strange at all that different manufacturers use different formats.
I do agree with you though that we need open standards as far as RAW is concerned. I don't agree that the film world is any better though.
Sure it's a nice intro to pipelining for those that haven't taken an introduction to computer engineering; but it doesn't have that much to do with how a modern CPU works.
It is true that modern CPUs use pipelining, but the basic model described here is only used if you want to try and implement your own CPU for fun. Modern CPUs are super-scalar monsters with out-of-order execution and custom internal micro code. But I guess you'll have to start somewhere.
If you want look at what a real modern CPU looks like I recommend Hannibal's excellent CPU articles over at ArsTechnica. He has gone over quite a few different architectures as well as the CPUs found in the X360 and PS3. Interesting reading for all! There are also some articles on stuff like cache and memory architecture.
I agree HDLs (be it Verilog or VHDL) are much fun to use. And developer boards are becoming more affordable as well. (You can get a dev board with an FPGA and a bunch of ports for a few hundred bucks.)
The drawback is that most of the high-end tools (Modelsim and synthesisers) are extremely expensive. But there are often free tools that work allright, I know Xilinx supply these for free.
The "government restriction", for many libertarians (often seen as the biggest promoters of true capitalism) at least, would include the argument that the government should not aid OR abet any enterprise, in addition to not restricting them.
The real issue comes down to why corporations feel that "trampling our rights" is okay. Well, you needn't look any further than the myraid of government licenses, regulations, and tax laws to see why businesses feel justified in harming the citizens that work for them. This is the kind of naive thinking which drives me away for libertarians.
There seems to be this prevalent "the free market" will solve anything. Seems like no-one knows their history enough that when "the free market" ruled during the beginning of the industrial era factory workers were more or less slaves (they got paid but no boarding) to the wims of the factory owners. Only after government restrictions and worker unions was a balance between the two met. (I guess there will never be complete balance, just less unfair in one way or the other.)
The reason companies do this is because they have exactly one reason to exist. To Make Money. There are no other objectives for a company. Furthermore if the company is on the stock exchange the board has a resposibility to their owners (stock holders) to Make More Money. If it were legal a corporate entity would have no qualms about killing off half of it's workers as well as consumers in the process, as long as they made more money that way.
It Is All About The Money.
Somehow libertarians seem to think that if we just "made it easier for companies" then everything would suddenly be nice and rose fields will spring everywhere the Free Market arrived. Not gonna happen! Look at the developing nations and specifically China to get a good look at how well companies treat their employees when there are no laws restricting them.
As long as they can get more workers they are happy to chew on them for a while and then spit them out when they are useless.
"Oh, but that can't happen here! We live in America!" Oh yeah? Did you happen to look at all the reports from sweat shops at EA games the last few months? Those were legal ways in order to abuse your employees to the point of where they were used up both at work and wrt their personal life.
I seem to have gotten off on a bit of a rant here. Sorry 'bout that, just something I had to get off my chest.
I have two screens at home (LCD 20") and one at work (LCD 19"). Personally I find it a lot easier to develop with two screens than one. The biggest reason being that I can run my develop program on one screen and other stuff (docs, mail etc) on the second.
If I'm debugging it's even better as I can have program and logs etc running on one screen and the debugger on the other.
Many businesses don't buy added screens despite the added productivity because the people signing the purchase orders are not the same that see the benefits of money rolling in.
WTF does the fact that it's patented have to do with anything? Mobile phones contain a bunch of patented technologies, so I guess SMS would be discarded as well.
Yes because we all know that it's not allowed that we use patented things. Then we'll all go to hell.
Really, T9 is a pretty good idea. It's both hardware and software. It seems like that group were the first to do it (at least every phone maker seems to think so). As far as I can say it's a patentable idea.
The point was to compare to a Japanese teenager since they use japanese to message in. That language is significantly more complex in written form than western languages. There is apparently a japanese form of morse code, but that only handles kana (phonetics) and not kanji. As such the two are not really comparable.
Besides I think the topic was sending a prewritten message, so thoughts of what to write are not that limiting.
The problem with "AI" as a term is that it is pretty much all encompassing. It's a bit like Theory of Everything amongs physics.
But I wouldn't say that research has been futile though, far from it really. The thing is that ever since humans began thinking about intelligence we have formed new hypothesises about how it works. However it really wasn't until we started to try and replicate the effect in a "dumb" system that we really got to the bottom of things. In the early days everyone was confident that we'd soon have this AI thing working. Since they we have discovered a lot of things which are not AI which we previously thought would be AI. (Things like chess computers, expert system and so on.) It turns out that most of these are just different (elaborate) ways to search.
While that knowledge hasn't really given us any AI computers, we have gained a lot of knowledge about how intelligence works. (Or rather, how it doesn't work.)
I have worked a bit with computer vision, image analysis and AI; I think what you really want to look for is computer vision or image analysis tools, not "AI". In my experience if anything has "AI" in the title it's likely bogus marketing at work - buyer beware!
When I was taking classes in this area some interesting work wrt cancer was done by multispectral imaging tools. This basically mean that you use images that are taken outside the range of our human vision to look for things. This is one quite efficient way to find things that are very hard or impossible to find in normal pictures.
My advice to the original poster is to look for help at technical universities in your area. I know that the university where I studies they cooperated with research hospitals and other medical places to find new ways of doing this type of things. You could also look around for companies that does this sort of thing and start examining what they have.
But you need to practice A LOT to keep up your morse skills. I learned it once and now I can't even beep out my name.
T9 OTOH scales well with ability of operator as the letters are written on the keys. If you forget how to do it just look at the keys and they will help you.
It would be interesting to compare morse vs a japanese teenager. How does morse code work with kanji (ie Unicode characters)? Does it at all?
And if they, as you say, compared morse to multitap instead of T9 (predictive input) then the comparison is worse than useless. I would imagine that T9 and morse would be about equal. The bonus with T9 being that you don't have to work as a professional for 30+ years to get your speed up.
But it would be kind of neat to have a morse code "reader" in a phone which used the vibrator. So it'd vibrate the message (yeah yeah, perverts!) so you could "read" it while your phone was in your pocket (yeah yeah, perverts!).
... and that AI was actually a good movie. But I guess the moderation of my post will depend on the opinion of the movie by the randomly selected dude with the mod points.
Personally I got bored with that movie due to inconsistencies. First, what moron designs a robot with a mounth which leads into an open computer in the chest cavity? Now in the "don't eat food" scene this causes him to short out and fail.
Later in the movie he falls into a swimming pool but apparently his circuit boards are not affected by water, only spinache, since this time he doesn't short out.
It was at this point my interest in the movie ended and I just went through the motions in the end.
Actually that part where he defended Palpatine was the only part in his fall that was any good. One rare moment in these last 3 movies where I could actually understand what the characters where supposed to feel and they didn't even say it out loud.
The rest of his fall was sucky though. As the grandparent wrote, it could have been much better without a lot of effort. (Or rather, with any effort.)
Besides you'd think that the most powerful Jedi ever would have a certain resistance to force influencing. All other powerful force users are after all.
Neither could I, until I got an Xbox "to mod and watch movies". And while I did eventually mod it and now use it a lot to watch movies I still play on it (and the later aquired GameCube) a lot more than on the PC.
It's just nicer to play sitting on the couch (or rather slouching on the couch).
Try it, you may like it. And if you don't you can always mod it and get a killer media client out of it.
Slashdot Mirror
That's what the hype claims. Problem is, all of that means you need to get more data into and out off the CPU, and that means less bandwidth for other stuff.
And I have yet to see a CPU that can handle sound processing better than a DSP. That's what they are for.
I believe his point was that you first move in to a 3D scene created from one picture (not impossible but requires human interaction), then rotate and zoom on an object not visible in the first image (naturally impossible) and finally sharpening it to see details not existing previously.
Do that with a command line and I'm impressed!
The is one resource for information on Bluetooth compatability and that is the list of qualified products on the Bluetooth.org qualification program site. (It's a bitch to find via links though.) One search and then a click on the "details" will tell you exactly which profiles that device is qualified for. If you have multiple devices, just check that they match up wrt profiles and you are good to go.
Why they don't advertice that list to help consumers is beyond me. (Probably because it's a lot of work to figure out.) BTW you should look for devices which support the Sync profile. Some devices (eg Nokia) implement their own sync system on top of serial port profile instead, that works too but it's not as "clean" and requires special PC software.
On topics of phones I'd ignore the ringtones part, just don't use annoying ringtones. (Mine is always set to silent.) Personally I like Sony-Ericsson phones, but that's just me. (They tend to work well with Bluetooth as well.)
Many newer phones support Java MIDP (J2ME) which might be fun if you like programming and want to add a little to your own phone.
I only works in the way that it installs programs on OSX. It doesn't solve the problems inherent for GNU/Linux.
In order to make it work on GNU/Linux you'd need to have all standard libraries installed per default or just include everything as "dll's" in the application package.
The reason it works for OSX is because OSX is an extremely controlled platform which allows them to make assumptions that are not valid on GNU/Linux. OSX doesn't even run on more than one plaform (at least not with end users who do the installing) or anything but special built hardware. Of course it works without a hitch, they'd had to be the worst designers in the world not to make it work!
It really depends on how the added data is stored there. If it is stored in a fasion which makes it possible for others to figure out what it means then that's one thing. If they put encrypted data there then that is another thing.
.DNG but besides that not much changes from the current situation.
There is also a risk that the camera manufacturers just dump all meta data into a "private" area for no real good reason. Apparently meta data is often obfuscated in RAW files, this includes things like white balance and such things. Hardly something that is very specific to the camera but they do it because they can or just because they can't be bothered to do it right.
So the danger with DNG is that we move to a format where all the RAW files from cameras have to format
Personally I think the most important thing is to make professional photographers aware of the situation. There was an article about the OpenRAW project on Luminous-Landscapes but it didn't cause much stir in the cummunities I look. (Eg fredmiranda.com which has a lot of good amateurs and pros.)
It's open but parts of it are still closed. I made a comment about that in a differerent post.
So in the end you end up with a similar situation. You can read the data but you don't know exactly how to treat it.
Oh you mean you'd rather use propriatary film with propriatary developer chemicals? There is nothing particularly "open" about that besides that the chemicals are available to buy in most photography stores. If they go out you will no longer be able to develop your old exposed film.
Just to be clear, RAW is like the undeveloped exposed negative. After "developing" it to a TIFF16 or whatever format you want to have. You might think that RAW is equivalent to the undeveloped negative, but it really isn't.
Besides, there is always DCRAW which allows you to "develop" your RAW files in an OSS fasion.
Furthermore the reason RAW formats vary between makers is because it is raw data from the CCD/CMOS. So it's not strange at all that different manufacturers use different formats.
I do agree with you though that we need open standards as far as RAW is concerned. I don't agree that the film world is any better though.
Sure it's a nice intro to pipelining for those that haven't taken an introduction to computer engineering; but it doesn't have that much to do with how a modern CPU works.
It is true that modern CPUs use pipelining, but the basic model described here is only used if you want to try and implement your own CPU for fun. Modern CPUs are super-scalar monsters with out-of-order execution and custom internal micro code. But I guess you'll have to start somewhere.
If you want look at what a real modern CPU looks like I recommend Hannibal's excellent CPU articles over at ArsTechnica. He has gone over quite a few different architectures as well as the CPUs found in the X360 and PS3. Interesting reading for all! There are also some articles on stuff like cache and memory architecture.
I agree HDLs (be it Verilog or VHDL) are much fun to use. And developer boards are becoming more affordable as well. (You can get a dev board with an FPGA and a bunch of ports for a few hundred bucks.)
The drawback is that most of the high-end tools (Modelsim and synthesisers) are extremely expensive. But there are often free tools that work allright, I know Xilinx supply these for free.
The "government restriction", for many libertarians (often seen as the biggest promoters of true capitalism) at least, would include the argument that the government should not aid OR abet any enterprise, in addition to not restricting them.
The real issue comes down to why corporations feel that "trampling our rights" is okay. Well, you needn't look any further than the myraid of government licenses, regulations, and tax laws to see why businesses feel justified in harming the citizens that work for them.
This is the kind of naive thinking which drives me away for libertarians.
There seems to be this prevalent "the free market" will solve anything. Seems like no-one knows their history enough that when "the free market" ruled during the beginning of the industrial era factory workers were more or less slaves (they got paid but no boarding) to the wims of the factory owners. Only after government restrictions and worker unions was a balance between the two met. (I guess there will never be complete balance, just less unfair in one way or the other.)
The reason companies do this is because they have exactly one reason to exist. To Make Money. There are no other objectives for a company. Furthermore if the company is on the stock exchange the board has a resposibility to their owners (stock holders) to Make More Money. If it were legal a corporate entity would have no qualms about killing off half of it's workers as well as consumers in the process, as long as they made more money that way.
It Is All About The Money.
Somehow libertarians seem to think that if we just "made it easier for companies" then everything would suddenly be nice and rose fields will spring everywhere the Free Market arrived. Not gonna happen! Look at the developing nations and specifically China to get a good look at how well companies treat their employees when there are no laws restricting them.
As long as they can get more workers they are happy to chew on them for a while and then spit them out when they are useless.
"Oh, but that can't happen here! We live in America!" Oh yeah? Did you happen to look at all the reports from sweat shops at EA games the last few months? Those were legal ways in order to abuse your employees to the point of where they were used up both at work and wrt their personal life.
I seem to have gotten off on a bit of a rant here. Sorry 'bout that, just something I had to get off my chest.
I have two screens at home (LCD 20") and one at work (LCD 19"). Personally I find it a lot easier to develop with two screens than one. The biggest reason being that I can run my develop program on one screen and other stuff (docs, mail etc) on the second.
If I'm debugging it's even better as I can have program and logs etc running on one screen and the debugger on the other.
Many businesses don't buy added screens despite the added productivity because the people signing the purchase orders are not the same that see the benefits of money rolling in.
I believe they will learn about irony and sarcasm next month.
WTF does the fact that it's patented have to do with anything? Mobile phones contain a bunch of patented technologies, so I guess SMS would be discarded as well.
Yes because we all know that it's not allowed that we use patented things. Then we'll all go to hell.
Really, T9 is a pretty good idea. It's both hardware and software. It seems like that group were the first to do it (at least every phone maker seems to think so). As far as I can say it's a patentable idea.
The point was to compare to a Japanese teenager since they use japanese to message in. That language is significantly more complex in written form than western languages. There is apparently a japanese form of morse code, but that only handles kana (phonetics) and not kanji. As such the two are not really comparable.
Besides I think the topic was sending a prewritten message, so thoughts of what to write are not that limiting.
The letters corresponding to that particular key are written on the key. Ie "2" has characters "abc" on it and so on.
Naturally the same is true for multi-tap.
The problem with "AI" as a term is that it is pretty much all encompassing. It's a bit like Theory of Everything amongs physics.
But I wouldn't say that research has been futile though, far from it really. The thing is that ever since humans began thinking about intelligence we have formed new hypothesises about how it works. However it really wasn't until we started to try and replicate the effect in a "dumb" system that we really got to the bottom of things. In the early days everyone was confident that we'd soon have this AI thing working. Since they we have discovered a lot of things which are not AI which we previously thought would be AI. (Things like chess computers, expert system and so on.) It turns out that most of these are just different (elaborate) ways to search.
While that knowledge hasn't really given us any AI computers, we have gained a lot of knowledge about how intelligence works. (Or rather, how it doesn't work.)
I have worked a bit with computer vision, image analysis and AI; I think what you really want to look for is computer vision or image analysis tools, not "AI". In my experience if anything has "AI" in the title it's likely bogus marketing at work - buyer beware!
When I was taking classes in this area some interesting work wrt cancer was done by multispectral imaging tools. This basically mean that you use images that are taken outside the range of our human vision to look for things. This is one quite efficient way to find things that are very hard or impossible to find in normal pictures.
My advice to the original poster is to look for help at technical universities in your area. I know that the university where I studies they cooperated with research hospitals and other medical places to find new ways of doing this type of things. You could also look around for companies that does this sort of thing and start examining what they have.
But you need to practice A LOT to keep up your morse skills. I learned it once and now I can't even beep out my name.
T9 OTOH scales well with ability of operator as the letters are written on the keys. If you forget how to do it just look at the keys and they will help you.
I doubt that morse would be significantly faster than T9 (predictive input for mobile phones). And T9 would require a lot less training.
Perhaps a training program for T9/multitap is in order for mobile phones? Just like the old typist programs for computers.
It would be interesting to compare morse vs a japanese teenager. How does morse code work with kanji (ie Unicode characters)? Does it at all?
And if they, as you say, compared morse to multitap instead of T9 (predictive input) then the comparison is worse than useless. I would imagine that T9 and morse would be about equal. The bonus with T9 being that you don't have to work as a professional for 30+ years to get your speed up.
But it would be kind of neat to have a morse code "reader" in a phone which used the vibrator. So it'd vibrate the message (yeah yeah, perverts!) so you could "read" it while your phone was in your pocket (yeah yeah, perverts!).
Personally I got bored with that movie due to inconsistencies. First, what moron designs a robot with a mounth which leads into an open computer in the chest cavity? Now in the "don't eat food" scene this causes him to short out and fail.
Later in the movie he falls into a swimming pool but apparently his circuit boards are not affected by water, only spinache, since this time he doesn't short out.
It was at this point my interest in the movie ended and I just went through the motions in the end.
It's like the old saying: England is going metric, inch by inch.
Actually that part where he defended Palpatine was the only part in his fall that was any good. One rare moment in these last 3 movies where I could actually understand what the characters where supposed to feel and they didn't even say it out loud.
The rest of his fall was sucky though. As the grandparent wrote, it could have been much better without a lot of effort. (Or rather, with any effort.)
Besides you'd think that the most powerful Jedi ever would have a certain resistance to force influencing. All other powerful force users are after all.
Neither could I, until I got an Xbox "to mod and watch movies". And while I did eventually mod it and now use it a lot to watch movies I still play on it (and the later aquired GameCube) a lot more than on the PC.
It's just nicer to play sitting on the couch (or rather slouching on the couch).
Try it, you may like it. And if you don't you can always mod it and get a killer media client out of it.