This is exciting research, and just the sort of thing that GM should be used for. If the researchers can add the necessary information to white blood cells so that they recognize cancer cells as "foreign", and respond accordingly, then we might see a future in which the cure isn't worse than the disease. Chemo and radiation are both damned indiscriminate, and there's an upper limit to how much of either can be administered to a person. Tweaking white blood cells so that they do their job more effectively would be a far better answer, since they wouldn't attack healthy tissue.
Not only does this show promise for cancer (it's being used on bowel cancers, but I can see more widespread applications), the findings could prove useful in the future treatment of autoimmune disorders. I'm very much looking forward to the developments that are going to come out of this line of research.
I had their press release figured for a hoax from the moment I heard about it this morning. If Peter Jackson found the usual round of chat-shows and other promotional tomfoolery to be disruptive to post-production, how much more so would the ensuing brouhaha be? Imaging several thousand outraged fans, still smarting from plot changes in The Two Towers, descending on Wellywood; camping on his doorstep, saying "Mr. Jackson? We'd like a word with you..."
Now, as for the rest of your post; take a deep breath, okay? In any online group as large as/., there are going to be duplicate posts; simply because we're all geeks here, and we're drawing from a relatively finite pool of things that appeal to us. Also, news releases get recycled and updated, and maybe somebody didn't see the article the first time around. Spelling mistakes happen even to the best of us; one of the most brilliant people I know is horribly dyslexic. Spellcheckers are obviously of no use to him, but it doesn't mean that he's any less intelligent for it. Some people simply need their editors to come in the form of peripheral wetware (like a spouse), that's all. And some people are adept speakers, but can't manage to intelligibly express themselves in a visual forum if their lives depended on it.
Annoying? Yes, mildly. But certainly not worth getting your knickers in quite so tight a twist as you've managed. This is supposed to be - at some level, anyway - fun, remember?;-)
...guaranteed to make you lose sleep! Now, given the current political situation, how long do you think it will be before Eisner decides to try marketing them again? *dramatic shudder*
"Hi, I'm geekwench, and I'm an animation addict..." Silly, but true; I love the illusions created by well-done blobs of ink and paint (or well-done CGI.) Spirited Away was a beautifully made film, and I shuddered when I found out that Disney was handling the US distribution, because I knew that there was no way in hell that they would give it the marketing that it deserved. Fast-forward past Oscar night: Spirited Away walks away with the gold. I find it absolutely hilarious that Disney in general (and Eisner in particular) is sitting down to a 3-course meal of crow right about now. Much as I liked Lilo and Stitch, it was good because the filmmaker got Disney to stay the hell out of his way for the most part. I've been hoping that somebody would come along to derail the Disney juggernaut for a long time. Don Bluth had potential, but not the budget. Bakshi doesn't have the broad appeal. Pixar became an ally. Dreamworks is still too much in its infancy to really tell. OTOH, Japanese companies have been putting out some amazing stuff for quite a while now, with very little recognition outside of the community of "anime fans." The fact that the Mouse's in-house product lost to the redheaded stepchild has put a nice warm fuzzy feeling in my cynical, coal-black heart. Maybe AMPAS doesn't have its collective head stuck entirely where the sun don't shine after all.
Video surveillance, especially in public areas, is one of those sticky subjects that invariably provokes a strong opinion. Surveillance cameras are bad, but the footage that leads police to a serial rapist is not. If you have nothing to hide, then you have nothing to fear. OTOH, do you want a record of your weekly routine filed away somewhere; and why is it anyone's business when and where you pick up your dry-cleaning?
As has been already said: like it or not, the cameras are here to stay. They serve many truly useful purposes. (The jury is still out as to whether tracking red-light scofflaws is among those useful purposes.) However, as we have seen many times, any useful technology can be abused. The only thing that will keep the Total Information Awareness project from becoming an Orwellian nightmare is the public's insistance on accountability. As an aside: Just don't ask me right now if I believe that the public is capable of insisting on any such thing. The short answer is cautiously optimistic, but not before we're slapped repeatedly in the face to make us aware again of why accountability is a Good Thing.
An earmark of good animation is that it has an illusion of reality to it. This is why Pixar Studios' product, although more "cartoony", is very convincing. There are all sorts of little details included. After watching the trailer (I believe that someone else mentioned this as well), I noticed that not one of the characters blinked. There's also an overall feeling of "not quite right, somehow." Air, human skin, and various other surfaces, all bend light in distinctive ways. CGI figures, no matter how well-rendered they are, have 'edges' that are visually crisp. The characters are just a little too perfect. People and real objects aren't.
Really, what's the point of the exercise, apart from the "but it's sooo kewwwl" factor, and possible future studio leverage against the SAG? [snarky chuckle] If you want absolute photo-realism, just shoot live-action, and you know you'll be right on target. OTOH, live-action is the best reference resource for any animator, CGI or otherwise. Personally, I think that the very best CGI that I've seen lately was shot live with motion-capture: Andy Serkis' performance as Gollum in The Two Towers. Andy's little tics and quirks were what made the character come to life. No matter how good the current hardware and software is, there are [gasp] some things that a computer just can't do. A computer is an incredible tool to use in the production of art - I know from experience; I use mine for all sorts of art-oriented applications. But art isn't produced by logorithms alone. Like any other artist, CGI animators need to learn how to really see and observe the world around them. The quality of an artists' observations always shows up on whatever "canvas" they use.
...(bright merciful heavens, great minds really do run along similar tracks), my concern is the length of time that this technology will take to trickle-down. Much as I'd like to see alternative energy sources get the R&D funding that they deserve, the fact remains that the world still largely runs on fossil fuels. It will take any new fuel technology a long time to be implemented; and the first people to jump on the bandwagon will be a) well-heeled 'green' types and b) geeks who can afford to shell out for something that's just so darn kewwwl. Full use and acceptance, even in the US, will take decades after the release, simply because Joe Sixpack isn't going to be willing or able to replace all of his electro-and-petrol-powered stuff.
Now, if they come up with an adaptor - count me in, baby!
I'm in favor of anything that provides even a minor stepping stone toward a reasonably non-toxic cancer treatment. Chemotherapy is probably the most effective bullet in the current arsenal, but the damages that it causes to healthy calls can be permanent. Depending on the organ, and the severity, the cure has the potential to be not much of an improvement over the disease.
None of the articles mentioned a timeline to human testing (at least not that I could find). I'm going to be watching this research closely. I've seen too many people succumb to their own bodies going haywire.
Slashdot Mirror
This is exciting research, and just the sort of thing that GM should be used for. If the researchers can add the necessary information to white blood cells so that they recognize cancer cells as "foreign", and respond accordingly, then we might see a future in which the cure isn't worse than the disease. Chemo and radiation are both damned indiscriminate, and there's an upper limit to how much of either can be administered to a person. Tweaking white blood cells so that they do their job more effectively would be a far better answer, since they wouldn't attack healthy tissue.
Not only does this show promise for cancer (it's being used on bowel cancers, but I can see more widespread applications), the findings could prove useful in the future treatment of autoimmune disorders. I'm very much looking forward to the developments that are going to come out of this line of research.
I had their press release figured for a hoax from the moment I heard about it this morning. If Peter Jackson found the usual round of chat-shows and other promotional tomfoolery to be disruptive to post-production, how much more so would the ensuing brouhaha be? Imaging several thousand outraged fans, still smarting from plot changes in The Two Towers, descending on Wellywood; camping on his doorstep, saying "Mr. Jackson? We'd like a word with you..."
Now, as for the rest of your post; take a deep breath, okay? In any online group as large as /., there are going to be duplicate posts; simply because we're all geeks here, and we're drawing from a relatively finite pool of things that appeal to us. Also, news releases get recycled and updated, and maybe somebody didn't see the article the first time around.
Spelling mistakes happen even to the best of us; one of the most brilliant people I know is horribly dyslexic. Spellcheckers are obviously of no use to him, but it doesn't mean that he's any less intelligent for it. Some people simply need their editors to come in the form of peripheral wetware (like a spouse), that's all. And some people are adept speakers, but can't manage to intelligibly express themselves in a visual forum if their lives depended on it.
Annoying? Yes, mildly. But certainly not worth getting your knickers in quite so tight a twist as you've managed. This is supposed to be - at some level, anyway - fun, remember? ;-)
Mickey Mouse gas masks. Oh. My. God.
"Hi, I'm geekwench, and I'm an animation addict..."
Silly, but true; I love the illusions created by well-done blobs of ink and paint (or well-done CGI.) Spirited Away was a beautifully made film, and I shuddered when I found out that Disney was handling the US distribution, because I knew that there was no way in hell that they would give it the marketing that it deserved.
Fast-forward past Oscar night: Spirited Away walks away with the gold. I find it absolutely hilarious that Disney in general (and Eisner in particular) is sitting down to a 3-course meal of crow right about now. Much as I liked Lilo and Stitch, it was good because the filmmaker got Disney to stay the hell out of his way for the most part. I've been hoping that somebody would come along to derail the Disney juggernaut for a long time. Don Bluth had potential, but not the budget. Bakshi doesn't have the broad appeal. Pixar became an ally. Dreamworks is still too much in its infancy to really tell. OTOH, Japanese companies have been putting out some amazing stuff for quite a while now, with very little recognition outside of the community of "anime fans." The fact that the Mouse's in-house product lost to the redheaded stepchild has put a nice warm fuzzy feeling in my cynical, coal-black heart. Maybe AMPAS doesn't have its collective head stuck entirely where the sun don't shine after all.
As has been already said: like it or not, the cameras are here to stay. They serve many truly useful purposes. (The jury is still out as to whether tracking red-light scofflaws is among those useful purposes.) However, as we have seen many times, any useful technology can be abused. The only thing that will keep the Total Information Awareness project from becoming an Orwellian nightmare is the public's insistance on accountability. As an aside: Just don't ask me right now if I believe that the public is capable of insisting on any such thing. The short answer is cautiously optimistic, but not before we're slapped repeatedly in the face to make us aware again of why accountability is a Good Thing.
Really, what's the point of the exercise, apart from the "but it's sooo kewwwl" factor, and possible future studio leverage against the SAG? [snarky chuckle] If you want absolute photo-realism, just shoot live-action, and you know you'll be right on target. OTOH, live-action is the best reference resource for any animator, CGI or otherwise. Personally, I think that the very best CGI that I've seen lately was shot live with motion-capture: Andy Serkis' performance as Gollum in The Two Towers. Andy's little tics and quirks were what made the character come to life. No matter how good the current hardware and software is, there are [gasp] some things that a computer just can't do.
A computer is an incredible tool to use in the production of art - I know from experience; I use mine for all sorts of art-oriented applications. But art isn't produced by logorithms alone. Like any other artist, CGI animators need to learn how to really see and observe the world around them. The quality of an artists' observations always shows up on whatever "canvas" they use.
Now, if they come up with an adaptor - count me in, baby!
None of the articles mentioned a timeline to human testing (at least not that I could find). I'm going to be watching this research closely. I've seen too many people succumb to their own bodies going haywire.