Radar and Lidar are good for some applications, but they're fundamentally quite different. They're both active sensing technologies- they send out energy in part of the electromagnetic spectrum and then look in that narrow range of the spectrum and see what bounces back. This means that you have trouble seeing things farther away since you'd have to throw more and more energy to keep your samples uniformly bright or uniformly spaced. And it means your power requirements are much higher.
I think the most interesting part of computer vision is that which deals with passive sensing, such as this work. It senses the electromagnetic radiation that comes from our sun, or moon, or man-made sources. By using the same spectrum that our eyes use it should be able to get a qualitative understanding of the world similar to what humans can achieve.
Also, as humans we've built the world to be visually interpreted at the EM frequencies that we sense. This means our signs are readable in those frequencies, our indoor lighting works in those frequencies, etc... By sensing in those frequencies you make sure you don't miss anything that humans can see.
What's preventing your "better solution" based on the wording of this bill?
I am a scientist and I very strongly support this requirement. I (and most other computer scientists) already put our papers online for free, but that's not true in some peripheral research fields that interest me. It's stupid for taxpayer funded research not to be available to everyone.
That's because the reviewers get fussy if you just start removing arbitrary image regions because they say that's not representative of realistic image completion tasks. That's partly true, but then again missing data or an unwanted object could appear almost anywhere in the image. The algorithm never sees what was in the hole, so it might as well be an arbitrary blob.
Take off your tin-foil hats long enough to ask how accurate this "forensic analysis" is. Has it been independently verified? Tested with known manipulated videos? The outputs of the forensic analysis don't even look reasonable for these segments.
Both companies have been using carbon fiber. The 787 uses an unprecedented amount of it. You can't say it's nothing new by citing an Airbus project that doesn't have a scheduled delivery until 2013. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbus_A350
I played EQ and I play WoW and I've never heard of them either. I've also been in the same guild for 7 years, and the guild has existed for more than a decade. So do I need to write a book now?
Sorry, you're arguing from a single case. True, it's the only one we're real certain of, but it's still just a single case....
Think about it your self, do a bit of reading, and make up your own mind.
But... but... I referenced an answer from professional astronomers. And while I gave the example of our own solar system, their answer says "They're oriented in all different directions. The size of a solar system is so much smaller than the size of the Galaxy, that the Galaxy's structure has no impact on the orientation of a solar system." That's a very strong statement from a scientist. Perhaps they've seen hundreds of planet forming discs at all angles and noticed a roughly uniform distribution?
Our own Solar system is not at all aligned with the galaxy. If it were, the milky way would appear more east-west in the night sky, especially during the equinox.
I don't think Flickr takes any of your photo rights. Show me the part of the ToS where they claim to "appropriate" your content. Flickr has even integrated different copyright licenses such as creative commons.
They have lots of questions in their FAQ about creative commons and default copyright license, but they don't address "Does Flickr take my copyrights just because I upload my pictures?" probably because they think that's insane.
I read through their terms of use and I certainly don't see anything about the transfer of copyright to Flickr.
Re:Old news -- reprofusion injury (really old news
on
Treating the Dead
·
· Score: 1
I'm skeptical that you've dismissed this article so easily. Ok, so people have known that reprofusion can cause injury for 20+ years? But the article says more than that. It says -
Reprofusion not only causes damage, it is the primary or only source of cell damage for short term oxygen loss (less than an hour). Reprofusion damage can be limited in several ways, and recently some of these have been tested in the field very successfully.
Now is all of that "really old news" as you state?
Wow, that defense lawyer is awesome. Read his response, it's not only legally strong but _technically_ strong. He really did his homework. The RIAA has to be worried by that response, because it would apply to almost any of their lawsuits.
Even if only 2 million of those subscribers were paying the $15/month model, they are still making plenty of money to appear on this list somewhere. Does the "games industry" no longer include PC games?
World of Warcraft has 8million players. If they all pay 15 dollars a month (and I don't know that they do, because I don't know the fees in other countries) then that's 1.44 Billion dollars.
I'm not sure I see any PC games in the lists in the article, actually.
I thought the high speed trains in Japan would stop in the event of an earthquake (before the earthquake actually hit them), http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shinkansen
"In the event of an earthquake, an earthquake detection system can bring the train to a stop very quickly"
Anyway, the idea of a broadcast system to warn of an earthquake is pretty obvious, the engineering task of doing it right without false positives is pretty difficult I bet.
Hmm, points taken. Especially about that final sentence. It certainly seems this author is using the term ignition in the manner that you describe. And perhaps the physics community as a whole. However, it's a dumb term to use to describe "self sustained reaction" since the dictionary definition of ignition indicates that ignition is the initial step of a combustion. "the process of initiating combustion or catching fire" or "The means by which burning is started" or "The initiation of combustion."
"The shaded region represents ignition where the energy output is not only sufficient to yield a net energy gain but is also sufficient to maintain plasma conditions."
That does not imply that "ignition" = "where the energy output is not only sufficient to yield a net energy gain but is also sufficient to maintain plasma conditions"
replace the word ignition with "trial" or "test" or "experiment" or "burn" or "fusion event"
you wouldn't now say that "trial" = "where the energy output is not only sufficient to yield a net energy gain but is also sufficient to maintain plasma conditions"
The last part of the sentence is a qualifier, not a definition.
Can you explain exactly what these engines are doing? I read this article and it's not very specific. How does it allow you to approximate an arbitrarily large and detailed texture? How is it fundamentally different from the swapping schemes he mentions?
I don't think your comment is fair. Do you not believe that fictional robots could have a real impact on the field of robotics? I believe they can, possibly more so than real robots.
From their list: 18) By the 9th century, many Muslim scholars took it for granted that the Earth was a sphere. The proof, said astronomer Ibn Hazm, "is that the Sun is always vertical to a particular spot on Earth". It was 500 years before that realisation dawned on Galileo. The calculations of Muslim astronomers were so accurate that in the 9th century they reckoned the Earth's circumference to be 40,253.4km - less than 200km out. The scholar al-Idrisi took a globe depicting the world to the court of King Roger of Sicily in 1139.
Galileo was responsible for many great discoveries, but I've never seen anyone claim that he discovered the Earth was round. Many argue that a round world was common knowledge in Europe, despite what their maps might make us believe.
I haven't tried that, but I think I might after reading your comment and several others. However, I also have symptoms in my non-mouse hand so I can't really expect that to solve the problem completely.
Slashdot Mirror
Radar and Lidar are good for some applications, but they're fundamentally quite different. They're both active sensing technologies- they send out energy in part of the electromagnetic spectrum and then look in that narrow range of the spectrum and see what bounces back. This means that you have trouble seeing things farther away since you'd have to throw more and more energy to keep your samples uniformly bright or uniformly spaced. And it means your power requirements are much higher.
I think the most interesting part of computer vision is that which deals with passive sensing, such as this work. It senses the electromagnetic radiation that comes from our sun, or moon, or man-made sources. By using the same spectrum that our eyes use it should be able to get a qualitative understanding of the world similar to what humans can achieve.
Also, as humans we've built the world to be visually interpreted at the EM frequencies that we sense. This means our signs are readable in those frequencies, our indoor lighting works in those frequencies, etc... By sensing in those frequencies you make sure you don't miss anything that humans can see.
What's preventing your "better solution" based on the wording of this bill?
I am a scientist and I very strongly support this requirement. I (and most other computer scientists) already put our papers online for free, but that's not true in some peripheral research fields that interest me. It's stupid for taxpayer funded research not to be available to everyone.
That's because the reviewers get fussy if you just start removing arbitrary image regions because they say that's not representative of realistic image completion tasks. That's partly true, but then again missing data or an unwanted object could appear almost anywhere in the image. The algorithm never sees what was in the hole, so it might as well be an arbitrary blob.
Mod parent up.
r ing.html
Take off your tin-foil hats long enough to ask how accurate this "forensic analysis" is. Has it been independently verified? Tested with known manipulated videos? The outputs of the forensic analysis don't even look reasonable for these segments.
There has been some real (peer reviewed) research on detecting digital forgeries by Dr. Hany Farid and his lab at Dartmouth:
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~farid/research/tampe
Both companies have been using carbon fiber. The 787 uses an unprecedented amount of it. You can't say it's nothing new by citing an Airbus project that doesn't have a scheduled delivery until 2013. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbus_A350
I played EQ and I play WoW and I've never heard of them either. I've also been in the same guild for 7 years, and the guild has existed for more than a decade. So do I need to write a book now?
Sorry, you're arguing from a single case. True, it's the only one we're real certain of, but it's still just a single case. ...
Think about it your self, do a bit of reading, and make up your own mind.
But... but... I referenced an answer from professional astronomers. And while I gave the example of our own solar system, their answer says "They're oriented in all different directions. The size of a solar system is so much smaller than the size of the Galaxy, that the Galaxy's structure has no impact on the orientation of a solar system." That's a very strong statement from a scientist. Perhaps they've seen hundreds of planet forming discs at all angles and noticed a roughly uniform distribution?
In any case then, the next question is if the solar systems in our galaxy mainly orbit in the plane of the galaxies rotation. I'd assume so.
b er=633
They don't. See http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/question.php?num
Our own Solar system is not at all aligned with the galaxy. If it were, the milky way would appear more east-west in the night sky, especially during the equinox.
I don't think Flickr takes any of your photo rights. Show me the part of the ToS where they claim to "appropriate" your content. Flickr has even integrated different copyright licenses such as creative commons.
They have lots of questions in their FAQ about creative commons and default copyright license, but they don't address "Does Flickr take my copyrights just because I upload my pictures?" probably because they think that's insane.
I read through their terms of use and I certainly don't see anything about the transfer of copyright to Flickr.
I'm skeptical that you've dismissed this article so easily. Ok, so people have known that reprofusion can cause injury for 20+ years? But the article says more than that. It says -
Reprofusion not only causes damage, it is the primary or only source of cell damage for short term oxygen loss (less than an hour).
Reprofusion damage can be limited in several ways, and recently some of these have been tested in the field very successfully.
Now is all of that "really old news" as you state?
Wow, that defense lawyer is awesome. Read his response, it's not only legally strong but _technically_ strong. He really did his homework. The RIAA has to be worried by that response, because it would apply to almost any of their lawsuits.
Even if only 2 million of those subscribers were paying the $15/month model, they are still making plenty of money to appear on this list somewhere. Does the "games industry" no longer include PC games?
Exactly what I was wondering. Pretty sad if true.
World of Warcraft has 8million players. If they all pay 15 dollars a month (and I don't know that they do, because I don't know the fees in other countries) then that's 1.44 Billion dollars.
I'm not sure I see any PC games in the lists in the article, actually.
I thought the high speed trains in Japan would stop in the event of an earthquake (before the earthquake actually hit them), http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shinkansen
"In the event of an earthquake, an earthquake detection system can bring the train to a stop very quickly"
Anyway, the idea of a broadcast system to warn of an earthquake is pretty obvious, the engineering task of doing it right without false positives is pretty difficult I bet.
I think your theory fails to account for his ability to sing perfectly, to speak to crowds, etc. his muscles clearly were not paralyzed.
Hmm, points taken. Especially about that final sentence. It certainly seems this author is using the term ignition in the manner that you describe. And perhaps the physics community as a whole. However, it's a dumb term to use to describe "self sustained reaction" since the dictionary definition of ignition indicates that ignition is the initial step of a combustion. "the process of initiating combustion or catching fire" or "The means by which burning is started" or "The initiation of combustion."
I think you're simply reading it wrong.
"The shaded region represents ignition where the energy output is not only sufficient to yield a net energy gain but is also sufficient to maintain plasma conditions."
That does not imply that "ignition" = "where the energy output is not only sufficient to yield a net energy gain but is also sufficient to maintain plasma conditions"
replace the word ignition with "trial" or "test" or "experiment" or "burn" or "fusion event"
you wouldn't now say that "trial" = "where the energy output is not only sufficient to yield a net energy gain but is also sufficient to maintain plasma conditions"
The last part of the sentence is a qualifier, not a definition.
What the heck? Did anyone else notice George Lucas about half way through that video?? Boggle.
Can you explain exactly what these engines are doing? I read this article and it's not very specific. How does it allow you to approximate an arbitrarily large and detailed texture? How is it fundamentally different from the swapping schemes he mentions?
General Electric builds nuclear weapons?
I recall an IP address that was something like 3xx.xxx.xxx.xxx in that movie.
(255 being the highest number possible in an IP address)
I don't think your comment is fair. Do you not believe that fictional robots could have a real impact on the field of robotics? I believe they can, possibly more so than real robots.
From their list:
/ eratos1.html
18) By the 9th century, many Muslim scholars took it for granted that the Earth was a sphere. The proof, said astronomer Ibn Hazm, "is that the Sun is always vertical to a particular spot on Earth". It was 500 years before that realisation dawned on Galileo. The calculations of Muslim astronomers were so accurate that in the 9th century they reckoned the Earth's circumference to be 40,253.4km - less than 200km out. The scholar al-Idrisi took a globe depicting the world to the court of King Roger of Sicily in 1139.
But as I understand it, the Egyptian Eratosthenes had discovered this same thing 11 centuries earlier:
http://outreach.as.utexas.edu/marykay/assignments
Galileo was responsible for many great discoveries, but I've never seen anyone claim that he discovered the Earth was round. Many argue that a round world was common knowledge in Europe, despite what their maps might make us believe.
I haven't tried that, but I think I might after reading your comment and several others. However, I also have symptoms in my non-mouse hand so I can't really expect that to solve the problem completely.
I used an evoluent vertical mouse for months. Where did I rest my hand? On the mousepad. Maybe if you have small hands this is an issue?
As it happens, the vertical mouse didn't seem to help at all with my RSI.