Instead of camera array? The latter is more flexible in terms of being able to have a controlled tradeoff between resolution and other parameters as needed, such as extended depth of field, capturing depth information, extended dynamic range, and others related to lightfield photography and computational photography.
Eisenhower, MacArthur, and a number of other top military officials at the time disagreed with there being a military necessity for using atomic weapons in Japan. Truman's chief of staff, Adm. Leahy, said that the nuking "was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender because of the effective sea blockade and the successful bombing with conventional weapons." The Japanese themselves later claimed that the Soviet Union's declaration of war was a more important factor in their surrender. Additionally, I quote from http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v16/v16n3p-4_Weber.html "In an article that finally appeared August 19, 1945, on the front pages of the Chicago Tribune and the Washington Times-Herald, Trohan revealed that on January 20, 1945, two days prior to his departure for the Yalta meeting with Stalin and Churchill, President Roosevelt received a 40-page memorandum from General Douglas MacArthur outlining five separate surrender overtures from high-level Japanese officials. (The complete text of Trohan's article is in the Winter 1985-86 Journal, pp. 508-512.) This memo showed that the Japanese were offering surrender terms virtually identical to the ones ultimately accepted by the Americans at the formal surrender ceremony on September 2 -- that is, complete surrender of everything but the person of the Emperor." There's no substance to your claim that a million lives would have been saved. This is at best a post-trauma rationalization and at worst propaganda.
It's not effective trolling if you have to put so much effort into it. See, you're the one that spent a bunch of effort making multiple AC posts here, whereas I got more karma boost. Kid, I was trolling on IRC while your grandfather was in diapers. Go back to 9fag
The Zune had better sound hardware. It was significantly better than even the new iPods and it really shone with decent headphones. However, most people saw the crappy UI and went for the more polished iPod.
Shame about the Zune, by the way, as it had a better hardware sound subsystem than the iPods have, both a better DAC chip and better analog stage after it. Besides the poor advertising and marketing, however, what did the Zune in was a subpar user interface.
Nowhere did I diss the Lego project. I just added a minor informative correction. The true Aspies are the ones getting their panties in a knot and overreacting over something small. Nice trolling attempt, though.
At Turing machine has infinite tape (memory). You cannot build one in the real world**. This is a deterministic LBA (linearly bounded automaton).
**for two reasons preventing infinite storage:
1. a real world automaton is limited in extent by its light cone, and you cannot rely on this growing forever since accelerating expansion of the universe eventually will prevent outer parts of the device from communicating back with lightspeed signals
2. the Bekenstein bound limits information density: you can only store a finite information in a finite space--so no arbitrary precision real numbers
Gamut is about being able to represent all colors that are perceptible in the real world. You're making an argument that because of immature technology, we should handicap our displays. It's the dumbest thing I've read in a long time on this site. The difficulties with neutral color are based on 1) poor calibration, and, more importantly, 2) insufficient quantization -- due to the extended gamut you need around 10 to 12-bit quantization _per channel_ to have sufficient precision. Considering most LCDs and OLEDs can't even do 8-bit and have to dither, the technology has a ways to go. Your argument basically reduces to this: we must use lower gamut since all implementations are shitty, whereas it should be--we should fix the implementation. You might as well say we shouldn't build faster airplanes because they'll fall apart, rather than that we should refine the technology in question.
It _is_ an issue of biology. And that's exactly what the larger encompassing graph represents: the perceptual color space for humans. Humans can see all colors in that; RGB can only represent the colors in the triangle, and most monitors are a subset of the triangle. This has nothing to do with physics so I'm not sure why you brought physics into the discussion. Next time I recommend counting to 10 before letting an itchy Submit-clicking finger take action. It gives you time to save later embarrassment.
It's not the number of colors but the color gamut. You seem to lack reading comprehension. The issue is not quantization (bit depth) but the saturation that can be achieved. One is completely unrelated to the other.
At your age, you should know better than to still be quoting a comic that's become lamer and shittier over the years, and wasn't even all that good to start with. It's become a cliche of pseudo-nerd culture.
That applies to a lot of consumer motors, but is not going to be the case in a professional product which is almost guaranteed to use a synchronous motor; there, the speed depends on the power line AC frequency, not voltage.
[Citation needed]
The ONLY significant change that is measurable between generations is that of the immune system, which is by evolutionary design, as the immune system is in a constant arms race with pathogens and needs to match some of their speed of change.
This is one of the dumbest comments I've read on slashdot. You're confusing quantization with extent. The article is very obviously talking about covering a larger part of the visible color gamut. RGB is represented by the triangle in this graph: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8f/CIExy1931_sRGB.svg You'll note it doesn't even cover 50% of visible colors. Most TVs and displays can't even reproduce the full RGB space. The 24-bit/16.7M merely refers to the number of colors and affects how smooth gradients are, and has nothing to do with the range of colors that can be reproduced.
For fuck's sake, I didn't expect this level of stupidity from someone with a sub-1M user ID!
Slashdot Mirror
OAM has been discredited in peer reviewed IEEE published paper: http://lup.lub.lu.se/luur/download?func=downloadFile&recordOId=2062936&fileOId=2339120
Instead of camera array? The latter is more flexible in terms of being able to have a controlled tradeoff between resolution and other parameters as needed, such as extended depth of field, capturing depth information, extended dynamic range, and others related to lightfield photography and computational photography.
So a big company with the HR resources to fast-track an implementation of an idea it rips off an individual inventor would have the advantage...
Eisenhower, MacArthur, and a number of other top military officials at the time disagreed with there being a military necessity for using atomic weapons in Japan. Truman's chief of staff, Adm. Leahy, said that the nuking "was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender because of the effective sea blockade and the successful bombing with conventional weapons." The Japanese themselves later claimed that the Soviet Union's declaration of war was a more important factor in their surrender. Additionally, I quote from http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v16/v16n3p-4_Weber.html "In an article that finally appeared August 19, 1945, on the front pages of the Chicago Tribune and the Washington Times-Herald, Trohan revealed that on January 20, 1945, two days prior to his departure for the Yalta meeting with Stalin and Churchill, President Roosevelt received a 40-page memorandum from General Douglas MacArthur outlining five separate surrender overtures from high-level Japanese officials. (The complete text of Trohan's article is in the Winter 1985-86 Journal, pp. 508-512.) This memo showed that the Japanese were offering surrender terms virtually identical to the ones ultimately accepted by the Americans at the formal surrender ceremony on September 2 -- that is, complete surrender of everything but the person of the Emperor." There's no substance to your claim that a million lives would have been saved. This is at best a post-trauma rationalization and at worst propaganda.
Nope. This can handle context-sensitive grammars. Nice trolling attempt.
It's not effective trolling if you have to put so much effort into it. See, you're the one that spent a bunch of effort making multiple AC posts here, whereas I got more karma boost. Kid, I was trolling on IRC while your grandfather was in diapers. Go back to 9fag
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2925839&cid=40372927 /b/.
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2925839&cid=40373297
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2925839&cid=40373333
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2925839&cid=40373365
Samefag detected. Go back to
>But noone cares
Except for those that modded me up.
The Zune had better sound hardware. It was significantly better than even the new iPods and it really shone with decent headphones. However, most people saw the crappy UI and went for the more polished iPod.
Shame about the Zune, by the way, as it had a better hardware sound subsystem than the iPods have, both a better DAC chip and better analog stage after it. Besides the poor advertising and marketing, however, what did the Zune in was a subpar user interface.
Nowhere did I diss the Lego project. I just added a minor informative correction. The true Aspies are the ones getting their panties in a knot and overreacting over something small. Nice trolling attempt, though.
Why did I get moderated down? Here are references backing up my post: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_bounded_automaton http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bekenstein_bound
At Turing machine has infinite tape (memory). You cannot build one in the real world**. This is a deterministic LBA (linearly bounded automaton). **for two reasons preventing infinite storage: 1. a real world automaton is limited in extent by its light cone, and you cannot rely on this growing forever since accelerating expansion of the universe eventually will prevent outer parts of the device from communicating back with lightspeed signals 2. the Bekenstein bound limits information density: you can only store a finite information in a finite space--so no arbitrary precision real numbers
Gamut is about being able to represent all colors that are perceptible in the real world. You're making an argument that because of immature technology, we should handicap our displays. It's the dumbest thing I've read in a long time on this site. The difficulties with neutral color are based on 1) poor calibration, and, more importantly, 2) insufficient quantization -- due to the extended gamut you need around 10 to 12-bit quantization _per channel_ to have sufficient precision. Considering most LCDs and OLEDs can't even do 8-bit and have to dither, the technology has a ways to go. Your argument basically reduces to this: we must use lower gamut since all implementations are shitty, whereas it should be--we should fix the implementation. You might as well say we shouldn't build faster airplanes because they'll fall apart, rather than that we should refine the technology in question.
It _is_ an issue of biology. And that's exactly what the larger encompassing graph represents: the perceptual color space for humans. Humans can see all colors in that; RGB can only represent the colors in the triangle, and most monitors are a subset of the triangle. This has nothing to do with physics so I'm not sure why you brought physics into the discussion. Next time I recommend counting to 10 before letting an itchy Submit-clicking finger take action. It gives you time to save later embarrassment.
It's not the number of colors but the color gamut. You seem to lack reading comprehension. The issue is not quantization (bit depth) but the saturation that can be achieved. One is completely unrelated to the other.
Who cares.
At your age, you should know better than to still be quoting a comic that's become lamer and shittier over the years, and wasn't even all that good to start with. It's become a cliche of pseudo-nerd culture.
That applies to a lot of consumer motors, but is not going to be the case in a professional product which is almost guaranteed to use a synchronous motor; there, the speed depends on the power line AC frequency, not voltage.
...they post instructions on making grey goo. *puts on flamebait retardant clothes*
[Citation needed]
The ONLY significant change that is measurable between generations is that of the immune system, which is by evolutionary design, as the immune system is in a constant arms race with pathogens and needs to match some of their speed of change.
Troll much? RGB doesn't even cover 50% of colors visible to the human eye. It's represented by the triangle here: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8f/CIExy1931_sRGB.svg The larger superset is the full CIE XYZ color space visible to the human eye.
This is one of the dumbest comments I've read on slashdot. You're confusing quantization with extent. The article is very obviously talking about covering a larger part of the visible color gamut. RGB is represented by the triangle in this graph: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8f/CIExy1931_sRGB.svg You'll note it doesn't even cover 50% of visible colors. Most TVs and displays can't even reproduce the full RGB space. The 24-bit/16.7M merely refers to the number of colors and affects how smooth gradients are, and has nothing to do with the range of colors that can be reproduced.
For fuck's sake, I didn't expect this level of stupidity from someone with a sub-1M user ID!
It doesn't even overlap 50%. Full RGB color space is the triangle in this graph; note the area it covers of all visible colors: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8f/CIExy1931_sRGB.svg
Uh, Rec. 709 is a small portion of the visible color gamut. It's represented by the triangle in this graph: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8f/CIExy1931_sRGB.svg Note the area it covers of the overall visible gamut is maybe 50%.