Okay, I don't really get what's being claimed here, but if what they're studying is so difficult to compute, why couldn't the people (if they are people) running the simulation just copy the experiment's methodology in the "real" universe and feed in the data?
(incidentally if anyone can explain in a dumbed-down way how something that happens in the universe could not be simulated in any way, I'd like to know more. It just [i]feels[/i] wrong as a claim)
Blinky looked at PacMan, gazing at his wide mouth and unblinking eye. They'd been on opposite sides for so long, but now, as he watched the yellow circle swallowing the pills, he felt a fluttering in his sheet...
I don't think YouTube does 50p at 480. You have to go to 720p at minimum.
So in this case, each field is being doubled to a frame
It looks like whatever he used has done something a bit more sophisticated than simply doubling lines.
If he's really serious about archiving, he should capture as 576i and save it losslessly, or at a high bitrate, then he can work from that to make his outputs. It sounds like he just captured an upscale from some box or other though. I'm not convinced it's done a perfect job. There seem to be some odd
The actual spatial resolution of a VHS tape is about 200 lines anyway. (the amount of detail you can perceive inside that higher resolution signal)
Not vertically it isn't. You can get your full 576 (interlaced) discrete lines. Horizontally I think it was usually quoted as being equivalent to around 400 pixels or so.
NASA's Hubble Space Telescope has observed a planet outside our solar system that looks as black as fresh asphalt because it eats light rather than reflecting it back into space.
Or, to put it another, slightly less flowery way, because it's black.
The audio will never be identical. The command will be identical.
They don't only look at the transcribed words of the recording. They check the recording itself first, and if it has a fingerprint (allowing for the fact that it won't be a bit-perfect copy) which matches audio from an Amazon ad, they ignore it.
And you admit that the Echo will not answer the question or command from the ad.
I said that it will not respond to audio - not words, questions, or commands - which matches that of an ad.
And what they pull out of the recording is the COMMAND,
Before pulling out the command, they check the audio clip via a fingerprint against their own stored recordings of their ads.
They do not identify the speaker, so they do not know whether it was spoken by an Amazon ad or a person.
They identify the recording as being a match to the audio of the ad and they ignore it.
The fact that no further audio-realm processing may happen - such as identifying individual speakers - has no bearing on this.
Then yes, all of the above, because they are showing uses that explicitly will not work in real life. That's false advertising.
You're either not getting it or you're being mind-numbingly pedantic. The echo will answer the exact questions that are being asked on the ad; except when they detect a sound clip identical to the ad. This is by design and is exactly how it should be, because no-one wants their Echo responding to an ad.
The devices have speech recognition but not specific voice recognition.
No, the devices don't have speech recognition - with the sole exception of recognising their wake word. When it hears the wake word, it starts recording, then it uploads the recording to Amazon's servers and they do the speech recognition.
If they identify a recording as matching an Amazon ad, they ignore it and tell your device not to respond.
I assure you this is not true. Every single Amazon commercial sets it off, consistently.
Well then I don't know what's wrong with your Echo, because mine never fails to recognise one of its own ads. The light comes on at the sound of "Alexa" - as it does occasionally when someone says something similar on TV - but then soon after goes off again without so much as the "bee-doop" noise it usually makes when dropping a request. It only, and consistently, does this when an Alexa ad comes on the TV.
Slashdot Mirror
Turn this crap off
Or you could just let people make up their own mind about it.
If no longer being in orbit rules it out from being called "oldest," then the headline is just tautological.
How does the tower know whether a phone is inside or outside one of these boundaries?
Okay, I don't really get what's being claimed here, but if what they're studying is so difficult to compute, why couldn't the people (if they are people) running the simulation just copy the experiment's methodology in the "real" universe and feed in the data?
(incidentally if anyone can explain in a dumbed-down way how something that happens in the universe could not be simulated in any way, I'd like to know more. It just [i]feels[/i] wrong as a claim)
The Planck is not the smallest length.
And then?
Another way would be to pass legislation to require carriers to block prison locations from connecting to the towers
How do you determine whether a phone is in a "prison location"?
Whatever Happened To the 'Year of Linux on Desktop'?
You know that's the joke, right?
If you want a serious answer, it's because it still doesn't "just work."
Bombers usually have bombs.
And yes, that Saudi Arabia. Did you think it might have been a different Saudi Arabia?
Pacfic
Blinky looked at PacMan, gazing at his wide mouth and unblinking eye. They'd been on opposite sides for so long, but now, as he watched the yellow circle swallowing the pills, he felt a fluttering in his sheet...
Well spin my nipple nuts and send me to Alaska.
He would be better off leaving it at 480-50P
I don't think YouTube does 50p at 480. You have to go to 720p at minimum.
So in this case, each field is being doubled to a frame
It looks like whatever he used has done something a bit more sophisticated than simply doubling lines.
If he's really serious about archiving, he should capture as 576i and save it losslessly, or at a high bitrate, then he can work from that to make his outputs. It sounds like he just captured an upscale from some box or other though. I'm not convinced it's done a perfect job. There seem to be some odd
The actual spatial resolution of a VHS tape is about 200 lines anyway. (the amount of detail you can perceive inside that higher resolution signal)
Not vertically it isn't. You can get your full 576 (interlaced) discrete lines. Horizontally I think it was usually quoted as being equivalent to around 400 pixels or so.
Your arms get really tired, for one thing.
2300K is in the visible spectrum, from what I read. Doesn't mean it won't still look pretty black.
NASA's Hubble Space Telescope has observed a planet outside our solar system that looks as black as fresh asphalt because it eats light rather than reflecting it back into space.
Or, to put it another, slightly less flowery way, because it's black.
They are not unconscious however
I dunno, some cats are pretty freakin' lazy.
And there's me thinking Google was run by a human. Oh well, I guess we can trust it.
Unless it's this guy.
Every time EME comes up, a sizable number of Slashdotters announce they support it
Do they?
The audio will never be identical. The command will be identical.
They don't only look at the transcribed words of the recording. They check the recording itself first, and if it has a fingerprint (allowing for the fact that it won't be a bit-perfect copy) which matches audio from an Amazon ad, they ignore it.
And you admit that the Echo will not answer the question or command from the ad.
I said that it will not respond to audio - not words, questions, or commands - which matches that of an ad.
And what they pull out of the recording is the COMMAND,
Before pulling out the command, they check the audio clip via a fingerprint against their own stored recordings of their ads.
They do not identify the speaker, so they do not know whether it was spoken by an Amazon ad or a person.
They identify the recording as being a match to the audio of the ad and they ignore it.
The fact that no further audio-realm processing may happen - such as identifying individual speakers - has no bearing on this.
That depends how many users there are. And it's free anyway (well, up to the point of bad publicity), so why not?
In response to Kjellberg's use of a racial slur, a number of video game players and developers have condemned the creator.
Well, yeah, God's done a lot of stupid stuff.
Oh wait, you mean the game guy? "Creator" is a bit grand for what he does.
You cared enough to comment when you could have just moved on to the next story.
Why aren't you over at the Knitting World forums telling them you don't care about knitting?
Then yes, all of the above, because they are showing uses that explicitly will not work in real life. That's false advertising.
You're either not getting it or you're being mind-numbingly pedantic. The echo will answer the exact questions that are being asked on the ad; except when they detect a sound clip identical to the ad. This is by design and is exactly how it should be, because no-one wants their Echo responding to an ad.
The devices have speech recognition but not specific voice recognition.
No, the devices don't have speech recognition - with the sole exception of recognising their wake word. When it hears the wake word, it starts recording, then it uploads the recording to Amazon's servers and they do the speech recognition.
If they identify a recording as matching an Amazon ad, they ignore it and tell your device not to respond.
What? No, none of the above.
I'm saying it specifically ignores the specific sound clips from Echo ads.
If I buy an Echo for the specific purpose of setting a ten minute time-out timer for Mr. Bear it will ignore that command?
Only if, for some reason, you insist on doing so by playing back a sample of the advert.
I assure you this is not true. Every single Amazon commercial sets it off, consistently.
Well then I don't know what's wrong with your Echo, because mine never fails to recognise one of its own ads. The light comes on at the sound of "Alexa" - as it does occasionally when someone says something similar on TV - but then soon after goes off again without so much as the "bee-doop" noise it usually makes when dropping a request. It only, and consistently, does this when an Alexa ad comes on the TV.