The design for the craft looks very similar to concepts by designer Luigi Colani. I've always liked his design style and I have a book that was published with much of his stuff from the 70s. Especially cool is his design for an aerodynamic tractor-trailor rig (18-wheel type) or his design of a hydrofoil plane/boat combination (a design that has since become a reality...it was posted on/. about a year or two ago, I think).
I couldn't get to the site to know if he is credited as the designer or if they did this on their own. Anybody have any info on that?
I've read the posts to this thread and wanted to try and clear up a couple of things.
1. This is NOT a two-dimensional display. It creates images that are as "real" as any other object, although made of light (think "Death Star attack briefing" here).
2. This means, that you can perceive the dimensionality (is that a word?) of the displayed objects even if you are blind in one eye, are color-blind, have only one leg, don't like cats, etc.
3. No glasses or other viewing "helpers" are needed. Watch the screen, Luke...
4. This object works much like a traditional big-screen projecttion television...only the screen is rotating around the centerpoint of the globe at a considerable speed. The speed is fast enough that your eyes can't really see the screen, but can see the projected images.
5. This is NOT a new concept. The new thing about it is that it is the LARGEST commercially one available to date (large as far as resolution). I've personally seen versions of this display that are about 3 feet (~1 meter) around that use a matrix of LEDs on a rotating board. Same effect, really....older technology....not as good as this one. Here's one of the google returns for this design. Another design that has had a good amount of research is to create images using lasers shot onto a spinning helix or screw shape.
6. So far, resolution is the biggest hurdle. Next is refresh rate (it is, quite obviously tied to the rotation speed and to the speed and falloff of the light emmiting device (LED, Laser, phosphor, etc).
6. It really is amazing to see it in person. Don't knock it. It will be in more wide-spread use in the near future and will be a huge leap forward for certain tasks. Most people will never see one (except maybe in a science museum) and will never need to use one, though.
7. Using a wireless network, now you too can forward a holographic message from Obi-wan to the Senate! heh.
I love these comments about Mississippi. They make me laugh at the ignorance of the posters.
For what it's worth, Mississippi is ranked THIRD in the US in computing power (behind New Mexico and California) and would rank something like #8 in the world compared to other countries total power.
40% of the US Department of Defense's computing power is in the state.
This is a pretty amazing fact that most people don't realize. So, chances are that you are living in a state or country that has less computer resources than the one that you are making fun of.
For more info I found a couple of sites talking about the state's computing power, clusters, and supercomputers:
MSU's ERC cluster and the rest of the research center.
I thought this info might be interesting for some of those on/. wanting to find out new information about some really cool facilities.
Bias warning: I worked at the ERC for many years on visualization and virtual reality (they have a CAVE).
Or, you could just read "Atlas Shrugged" by...
on
Opposing Open Source?
·
· Score: 1
Ayn Rand.
Rand was an incredible author during the great Industrial period of the early to mid 20th Century. "Atlas Shrugged" is directed at the industry of the time (Railroads, Steel, etc) but it is entirely on track when it comes to the software industry and, especially, open-source.
It is a long read, but is considered a classic novel. One of her other books is "The Fountainhead" which was turned into a movie in the late 50's I think.
After reading "Atlas Shrugged" I think you may have a new understanding of why people would be against open-source and why they consider it "un-American."
the charge is not for the software itself, but for the production costs associated with the media, tiny manual, etc...
You can supposedly walk into any Apple Store and get a free copy of the CD burned for you. I can't say for sure as I don't have an Apple Store within 200 miles. heh.
Still, the price seems a little high. And, they should have made some effort to offer the upgrade via download (although it is around 300 megs).
Wait until something similar happens to ???...
on
RIAA to DoS Pirates?
·
· Score: 1
Wait until some hacker out there does a similar attack on a large commercial entity. Take, say....MSNBC or CNN.com.
If they were continually attacked in just such a way (although I'm sure that a real hacker would be much more ingenious about it) then the government would be finding and prosecuting him for illegal acts aimed at the corporation.
How is this different? Sure it's probably technically legal....but it is riding the line and the line would certainly be "re-interpreted" by the powers-that-be if it were a single hacker doing the deed.
Slashdot Mirror
At least the journalist on this piece didn't tell us how much the star weighed using the IEEE international standard of Volkswagen Beetles.
The design for the craft looks very similar to concepts by designer Luigi Colani. I've always liked his design style and I have a book that was published with much of his stuff from the 70s. Especially cool is his design for an aerodynamic tractor-trailor rig (18-wheel type) or his design of a hydrofoil plane/boat combination (a design that has since become a reality...it was posted on /. about a year or two ago, I think).
I couldn't get to the site to know if he is credited as the designer or if they did this on their own. Anybody have any info on that?
I've read the posts to this thread and wanted to try and clear up a couple of things.
1. This is NOT a two-dimensional display. It creates images that are as "real" as any other object, although made of light (think "Death Star attack briefing" here).
2. This means, that you can perceive the dimensionality (is that a word?) of the displayed objects even if you are blind in one eye, are color-blind, have only one leg, don't like cats, etc.
3. No glasses or other viewing "helpers" are needed. Watch the screen, Luke...
4. This object works much like a traditional big-screen projecttion television...only the screen is rotating around the centerpoint of the globe at a considerable speed. The speed is fast enough that your eyes can't really see the screen, but can see the projected images.
5. This is NOT a new concept. The new thing about it is that it is the LARGEST commercially one available to date (large as far as resolution). I've personally seen versions of this display that are about 3 feet (~1 meter) around that use a matrix of LEDs on a rotating board. Same effect, really....older technology....not as good as this one. Here's one of the google returns for this design. Another design that has had a good amount of research is to create images using lasers shot onto a spinning helix or screw shape.
6. So far, resolution is the biggest hurdle. Next is refresh rate (it is, quite obviously tied to the rotation speed and to the speed and falloff of the light emmiting device (LED, Laser, phosphor, etc).
6. It really is amazing to see it in person. Don't knock it. It will be in more wide-spread use in the near future and will be a huge leap forward for certain tasks. Most people will never see one (except maybe in a science museum) and will never need to use one, though.
7. Using a wireless network, now you too can forward a holographic message from Obi-wan to the Senate! heh.
I love these comments about Mississippi. They make me laugh at the ignorance of the posters.
/. wanting to find out new information about some really cool facilities.
For what it's worth, Mississippi is ranked THIRD in the US in computing power (behind New Mexico and California) and would rank something like #8 in the world compared to other countries total power.
40% of the US Department of Defense's computing power is in the state.
This is a pretty amazing fact that most people don't realize. So, chances are that you are living in a state or country that has less computer resources than the one that you are making fun of.
For more info I found a couple of sites talking about the state's computing power, clusters, and supercomputers:
MSU's ERC cluster and the rest of the research center.
I thought this info might be interesting for some of those on
Bias warning: I worked at the ERC for many years on visualization and virtual reality (they have a CAVE).
Ayn Rand.
Rand was an incredible author during the great Industrial period of the early to mid 20th Century. "Atlas Shrugged" is directed at the industry of the time (Railroads, Steel, etc) but it is entirely on track when it comes to the software industry and, especially, open-source.
It is a long read, but is considered a classic novel. One of her other books is "The Fountainhead" which was turned into a movie in the late 50's I think.
After reading "Atlas Shrugged" I think you may have a new understanding of why people would be against open-source and why they consider it "un-American."
the charge is not for the software itself, but for the production costs associated with the media, tiny manual, etc...
You can supposedly walk into any Apple Store and get a free copy of the CD burned for you. I can't say for sure as I don't have an Apple Store within 200 miles. heh.
Still, the price seems a little high. And, they should have made some effort to offer the upgrade via download (although it is around 300 megs).
Wait until some hacker out there does a similar attack on a large commercial entity. Take, say....MSNBC or CNN.com.
If they were continually attacked in just such a way (although I'm sure that a real hacker would be much more ingenious about it) then the government would be finding and prosecuting him for illegal acts aimed at the corporation.
How is this different? Sure it's probably technically legal....but it is riding the line and the line would certainly be "re-interpreted" by the powers-that-be if it were a single hacker doing the deed.