That makes it profitable, and because of that, spam will continue.
The only way to get rid of spam is for everyone on the planet to swear off buying anything based on spam based advertising. I know I never respond to spam, but there's always going to be that one person who does...
On any major film, they will have all sorts of specialties. Some people just model, some people rig, some people paint textures, some people light the scene, some people manage the render farm, some people do the special effects, some do the composite, some people animate.
But, yes, it is an assembly line, and things are standardized as much as possible, but the assembly line does change a bit depending on the show.
Only on really small productions do you have one person doing everything.
When a character looks real, your brain expects it to move realistically. We look at humans all day long, so we know exactly how humans are supposed to move. If the animation is off by even a little bit, the brain knows something is amiss and we stop believing the character is real.
When a character is stylized, the audience suspends it's expectations. How exactly does a character like Bugs Bunny move? We don't know because we've never seen anything like that in real life. So, the good people at Warner Brothers show us how Bugs Bunny moves and we accept it as reality.
I'm an animator, and I know that the more real the images look, the more real the characters have to move. As you approach 100% reality, that last 5-10% becomes a very very steep slope. It's not easy.
This is why I prefer making cartoons, you get to write your own laws of physics.
Syd Mead and the rest of the designers (who's names escape me at the moment) did an incredible job designing to the limitations of CG at the time. The graphics still look great today, and in fact, I think Tron still stands apart from most of today's CG. Almost all of the current CG tries to look like reality, which makes it invisible. With Tron, you knew it was CG and that was cool.
If Tron had only had a good story, good acting, and hadn't opened against ET, this anniversary would have gotten more notice.
So, the few bugs that escape this new form of microbial torture will simply become stronger and even more resistant. Great. I am not a biologist, but are there any other ways of getting around this war of escalation?
Maybe scientists could find some other critter that the bugs like better, like cockroaches or the small dogs that live in women's purses.
The surprising answer is that Muslim suicide bombing has nothing to do with Islam or the Quran (except for two lines). It has a lot to do with sex, or, in this case, the absence of sex.
So they're bombing us so that they can go get laid in heaven with those 72 virgins.
I guess we need to start some sort of global escort service to stop terrorism.
This law only kills internet radio in the United States, it doesn't affect internet radio stations outside the US. I already listen to stations outside the US, and I'm sure there will be a heckuva lot more if this legislation passes.
So, in effect, this law will only serve to outsource these stations to other countries -- places where the RIAA can't extract any royalties at all. Brilliant, RIAA, brilliant...
I think one of the biggest issues with electric cars and plug-in hybrids is not battery life, but charge time. Right now, Tesla has a car that goes 200 miles on a charge at freeway speeds. The problem is that it takes several hours to charge it. When it takes hours to charge a car, then range is a problem. If you could charge a car in minutes, then a slightly reduced range is less of an issue.
One manufacturer (ZAP) is claiming their new ZAP-X car, based on a Lotus chassis, can get 350 miles with a charge time of 10 minutes using new nanotechnology batteries. Aerovironment (designers of the EV-1) has independently tested these batteries and claim they deliver as promised. But who knows, it could still be hype.
If Google can focus their attention on reducing charge times, then a lot of the problems associated with electric cars go away.
They are improving only a few percent a year, with no signs of any acceleration in this trend.
Yes, but how much battery do you really need? Does a car really have to go 500-1000 miles on a charge? Today you can buy a car that will travel freeway speeds for 200 miles on a charge. That car will serve 90% of most people's daily driving needs. That car is more expensive today, but prices will most likely drop as production ramps up.
I think one of the biggest issues is not battery life, but charge time. When it takes hours to charge a car, then range is a problem. If you could charge a car in minutes, then a slightly reduced range is less of an issue. One manufacturer (ZAP) is claiming their new ZAP-X car, based on a Lotus chassis, can get 350 miles with a charge time of 10 minutes using new nanotechnology batteries. Aerovironment (designers of the EV-1) has independently tested these batteries and claim they deliver as promised.
...In any event your parents were sneaking a few tokes on a joint in the parking lot of the theater (and a few gulps of Boone's Farm Strawberry Hill) that was showing Star Wars...
Electric cars are looking like the best bet for a clean car. The big issue, of course, is the batteries, but those problems are being solved very quickly.
I think the route to all electric cars will be traveled using better and better hybrid technology to wean people off of gasoline. Right now, my hybrid car uses it's batteries about 20-25% of the time. Next generation plug-in hybrids will at least double that, so you'll only use the gasoline engine 50% of the time. After that, you're looking at cars like the Chevy Volt where the power train is 100% electric and the gas engine is only used to power a generator. Concurrent with that, you'll see batteries evolve to the point where they're cheap and powerful enough to run a car around town for a day or two on a single charge.
Slashdot Mirror
That makes it profitable, and because of that, spam will continue.
The only way to get rid of spam is for everyone on the planet to swear off buying anything based on spam based advertising. I know I never respond to spam, but there's always going to be that one person who does...
...but I forgot what it said.
Here, let me pull it up on my iPhone.
Obviously, you're not in the business.
On any major film, they will have all sorts of specialties. Some people just model, some people rig, some people paint textures, some people light the scene, some people manage the render farm, some people do the special effects, some do the composite, some people animate.
But, yes, it is an assembly line, and things are standardized as much as possible, but the assembly line does change a bit depending on the show.
Only on really small productions do you have one person doing everything.
Westworld had 2d raster graphics for Yul Brenner's character.
I think they used vector graphics on the display screens of the spaceships in 2001.
The Robert Abel canned foods commercial with the shiny woman robot was one of the first realistic human animations...
Luxo Jr was the first CG animated short nominated for an Oscar
Tin Toy was the first CG short to win an Oscar
When a character looks real, your brain expects it to move realistically. We look at humans all day long, so we know exactly how humans are supposed to move. If the animation is off by even a little bit, the brain knows something is amiss and we stop believing the character is real.
When a character is stylized, the audience suspends it's expectations. How exactly does a character like Bugs Bunny move? We don't know because we've never seen anything like that in real life. So, the good people at Warner Brothers show us how Bugs Bunny moves and we accept it as reality.
You're right, it's not there yet.
I'm an animator, and I know that the more real the images look, the more real the characters have to move. As you approach 100% reality, that last 5-10% becomes a very very steep slope. It's not easy.
This is why I prefer making cartoons, you get to write your own laws of physics.
Syd Mead and the rest of the designers (who's names escape me at the moment) did an incredible job designing to the limitations of CG at the time. The graphics still look great today, and in fact, I think Tron still stands apart from most of today's CG. Almost all of the current CG tries to look like reality, which makes it invisible. With Tron, you knew it was CG and that was cool.
If Tron had only had a good story, good acting, and hadn't opened against ET, this anniversary would have gotten more notice.
So, the few bugs that escape this new form of microbial torture will simply become stronger and even more resistant. Great. I am not a biologist, but are there any other ways of getting around this war of escalation?
Maybe scientists could find some other critter that the bugs like better, like cockroaches or the small dogs that live in women's purses.
I'll say.
The surprising answer is that Muslim suicide bombing has nothing to do with Islam or the Quran (except for two lines). It has a lot to do with sex, or, in this case, the absence of sex.
So they're bombing us so that they can go get laid in heaven with those 72 virgins.
I guess we need to start some sort of global escort service to stop terrorism.
That would slim things down real quick.
A million bucks really isn't that much when it comes to something like this. Why are they doing it on the cheap?
I guess they spent all our money on Iraq. Almost a trillion dollars worth of it.
I thought Microsoft only used FUD on dumb consumers, but I guess now they're trying it on their employees as well.
I think most companies already keep track of what they sell and to whom. It's called accounting.
This law only kills internet radio in the United States, it doesn't affect internet radio stations outside the US. I already listen to stations outside the US, and I'm sure there will be a heckuva lot more if this legislation passes.
So, in effect, this law will only serve to outsource these stations to other countries -- places where the RIAA can't extract any royalties at all. Brilliant, RIAA, brilliant...
...but, government funded schools TAUGHT me to read.
Now my iPod FM trasmitter will suck even more.
One problem is that you'd have deadly high voltage rails in the middle of every street. I'm sure mothers and dog owners everywhere would love that.
I think one of the biggest issues with electric cars and plug-in hybrids is not battery life, but charge time. Right now, Tesla has a car that goes 200 miles on a charge at freeway speeds. The problem is that it takes several hours to charge it. When it takes hours to charge a car, then range is a problem. If you could charge a car in minutes, then a slightly reduced range is less of an issue.
One manufacturer (ZAP) is claiming their new ZAP-X car, based on a Lotus chassis, can get 350 miles with a charge time of 10 minutes using new nanotechnology batteries. Aerovironment (designers of the EV-1) has independently tested these batteries and claim they deliver as promised. But who knows, it could still be hype.
If Google can focus their attention on reducing charge times, then a lot of the problems associated with electric cars go away.
You haven't heard of the Automotive X_Prize?
h tml
http://www.xprize.org/xprizes/automotive_x_prize.
They're slow, inefficient, and thirsty.
Have you ever driven a hybrid? Mine is plenty fast and gets great gas mileage.
I will say that the current cars are only the start, and the technology will get better with each new generation.
They are improving only a few percent a year, with no signs of any acceleration in this trend.
Yes, but how much battery do you really need? Does a car really have to go 500-1000 miles on a charge? Today you can buy a car that will travel freeway speeds for 200 miles on a charge. That car will serve 90% of most people's daily driving needs. That car is more expensive today, but prices will most likely drop as production ramps up.
I think one of the biggest issues is not battery life, but charge time. When it takes hours to charge a car, then range is a problem. If you could charge a car in minutes, then a slightly reduced range is less of an issue. One manufacturer (ZAP) is claiming their new ZAP-X car, based on a Lotus chassis, can get 350 miles with a charge time of 10 minutes using new nanotechnology batteries. Aerovironment (designers of the EV-1) has independently tested these batteries and claim they deliver as promised.
...In any event your parents were sneaking a few tokes on a joint in the parking lot of the theater (and a few gulps of Boone's Farm Strawberry Hill) that was showing Star Wars...
Luke... I am your parents.
I'm sure glad that the GPS system was privately funded.
Oh wait...
Electric cars are looking like the best bet for a clean car. The big issue, of course, is the batteries, but those problems are being solved very quickly.
I think the route to all electric cars will be traveled using better and better hybrid technology to wean people off of gasoline. Right now, my hybrid car uses it's batteries about 20-25% of the time. Next generation plug-in hybrids will at least double that, so you'll only use the gasoline engine 50% of the time. After that, you're looking at cars like the Chevy Volt where the power train is 100% electric and the gas engine is only used to power a generator. Concurrent with that, you'll see batteries evolve to the point where they're cheap and powerful enough to run a car around town for a day or two on a single charge.