Animated Gifs are quite common nowadays - often being used as 'reaction-images' in forums and social media. In fact, the Millennials call any moving image that isn't a 'video' a 'Gif'. Their main limitation is that they are limited to 8 bits per pixel (with a palette) - hence 256 colours. Seeing that nowadays, just about everyone uses 24-bit colour, the MNG and APNG formats did not take off despite having been around for more than 10 years (IIRC, Mozilla deliberately decided to drop MNG from their browser back in 2003(?) for reasons unknown to myself). An image such as this satisfying animation of tea being poured would look a lot better if it wasn't limited to 256 colours. I really hope that whoever created it kept the source-material.
...of how organizations are resistant to change. They say that despite it's increased efficiency, organizations are inherently resistant to change, and use the DVORAK keyboard as an example when training management consultants.
that everything will have the colour #FFFFFF, which means everything will be invisible.
This reminds me of the Douglas Adams novel "Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency" when an electric monk got stuck because he believed everything was pink and therefore everything was indistinguishable from everything else, so he got stuck because he couldn't 'see' any obstacles, until he stopped believing it.
IIRC, back in the '90s, Hormel Foods (the company that made Spam) tried to sue a few websites that referred to junk mail as Spam or used Spam in such a context. Presumably, they were worried that this would give their product/brand a negative association. Unfortunately, like many of their contemporaries, they did not quite 'get' Internet-Culture. Perhaps this explains why many e-mail programs now refer to it as "Junk-Mail" instead of "Spam". I'm wondering if anyone did a study to see if Spam's association with junk e-mails had a positive or negative impact on the canned meat.
Am I the only one still in 2018 who whenever I install a new webbrowser, one of the first things I do is to turn the default background colour back to mosaic-grey? I cannot remember the precise colour code, but I suspect #C0C0C0 (192, 192, 192) is a good approximation. The reason I do this is so that any plaintext file looks just like I'm used to seeing it when I see it through a web-browser. Likewise, any HTML document without the colours defined would look like how HTML documents looked like before Netscape let you chnge the background[-colour].
One of the things I discover is that people always assume the default text is black and default background is white. Which means that if someone wants to change the text-colour, they may forget about the background colour, and their choice of text-colour may not work so well on grey as on white. Another annoying thing is that some people place transparent images with anti-aliasing and one-bit transparency working on the assumption that the text will blend into a white background. If the background is grey, it looks like the text has a white halo with a jagged edge. BTW I'm not sure if CSS lets you anti-alias text to an arbitrary colour, or if I'm only seeing this with 1-bit transparent images.
I keep hearing this when the topic of Universal Basic Income pops up. Do we really have such little imagination that we cannot think about what to do if we no longer have to find a job? Make art. Get a hobby. Make art. Start an open-source project. Make art. Make a thing. Make art. Make art. Make art. Remember. the 'Earth' without 'Art' is just 'Eh'.
But Neural Networks can be built using a Turing Machine. While such a neural network can never develop sentience, it is possible for it to develop intuition, which is basically just a form of pattern-recognition.
>We're going to have to shake this mindset that people need to work hard to be prosperous and those who aren't prosperous haven't worked hard. Once we can do that, and ironically this is the core of christian belief, we can design social systems which provide for everyone, regardless of their situation or whether or not they want to improve it or help others.
Ironically, the Protestant work ethic is associated with the "core of Christian belief".
>Fix these issues, and in my younger years I might have well taken a couple of long-shots. Who knows what might have come of that?
Of course, with UBI in place, you can do that in your older years too. GO! GO!! GO!!!
Perhaps they could do what WinAmp did when it's users were displeased with 3.0, and made 5.0 which was the best features of 2.0 and 3.0 combines -> 2+3=5 hence 5.0. Likewise, Microsoft could release Windows 17.
PS. I still use Windows 7, but miss the Windows 2000 UI and search-feature. Windows 2010 anyone?
Perhaps this could be used to discover new Hypothetical types of biochemistry and we can then speculate about many more types of alternative biochemistries ("life as we don't know it").
I don't think he's using the upscaler to get the framerate right, he's using it to convert 480i (576i?) to 1080i(p?). I have no idea why he insists on up-scaling the video to a resolution that's not an exact multiple of 480/576 - afterall, if you put the video at the source-resolution on Youtube, the viewers can choose whether or not to view it at fullscreen (whose resolution varies according to which monitor is displaying it) or in a window at it's original resolution, and the upscaling will be done at the receiving end. If someone has a 720p monitor, they will end up watching a down-scaled version of an up-scaled video.
Also, about the framerate, IIRC, standard PAL VHS tapes record video at 25Hz instead of 50fps, and in doing so, somehow merge two 50Hz interlaced frames into one 25Hz non-interlaced frame. If he was digitizing directly from broadcast television or some other video-source that runs at 50Hz interlaced, I can understand why he'd want a 50Hz video, but from VHS, I'd only recommend 25Hz.
Maybe his video-grabber setup only accepts HDMI input, and he's got a device for converting analogue video (eg. composite video) into a digital HDMI signal, but for some reason, his device insists on upscaling everything to 1080p. I myself have a SCART-to-HDMI device which I use to display the output of some of my old computers on a monitor that takes HDMI input, but unfortunately, it only seems to work properly at 60Hz even though it claims to be able to cope with 50Hz (thankfully, my old computers can also be told to output 60Hz instead of 50Hz).
But that would imply any Turing-Complete machine would be concious, as it can be attached to sensors, make decisions based on what it senses (and it's internal state), and react according to an algorithm. As any programmable computer can be abstracted to a basic Turing-Complete machine, it is relatively easy to determine whether or not the simplest form of a Turing-Complete machine can be concious (sentient) or not. Even neural-networks can run in software on a Turing-complete machine, so if we can prove that Turing-Complete machines are non-sentient, then we can conclude that any neural-network that can be emulated 100% in Software on a general-purpouse computing platform is not concious.
Pretty much this. Since Windows XP, Microsoft seems to be deliberately trying to sabotage desktop search. If you want to search just for a particular file (or set of files) using just their names, and not their contents, Microsoft are doing everything they can to get in your way. In Windows Vista, you had to select the search-filter from a drop-down list to say you were only interested in searching filenames. In Windows 7, they reduced the search-filters to just "Date modified" and "Size", and if you wanted more, you had to memorise the filter-name so you could type it out by hand. Thank goodness for utilities such as FileSearchEX and Search Everything. Before I discovered either of these, I sometimes had to resort to sharing the folder I wanted to search in, and plug a Windows 2000 machine on the network just to search for something. I've not used Windows 8 or 10 much, and when I did, I used Search Everything. Has the search of 8 and 10 become even worse, or did the Windows encrappyfying team move on to the UI instead?
Back in the deep mists of time, every programmer worth their salt knew that division was an expensive operation. If they were lucky, the numbers they would have to divide by would be a power of two, and doing so requires a single shift instead of a divide. Back in the day, compilers did not automatically substitute division by a power of two with a shift, and if you were reading sourcecode, you could tell that the programmer knew their stuff if they wrote "x>>1" instead of "x/2".
Then along came optimizing compilers, that were smart enough to know what you were trying to do, and for unsigned integers they would automatically substitute the divide with a shift. Soon after, people stopped writing a shift and just wrote a divide instead, trusting the compiler to do so and in the process, making the code easier to read.
A newer generation of programmers came along, and noticed nothing 'unoptimized' about division by constant powers of two, so they just took it for granted, and were completely unaware of this trick. However, one consequence of this is if picking an arbitrary number to divide by, if they don't choose a power of two, the compiler can no longer do the abovementioned optimization. It used to be the case that arbitrary choices of numbers were powers of two, but not anymore. In fact, if books that had the potential to be turned into video-games were written bearing in mind this optimization, we may see some top-level title-changes. For example, instead if calling it 50 Shades of Grey, E.L. James should have called it Sixty Four Shades of Grey, and if someone tried to compile it, they'd end up with a somewhat faster game.
Also, if we take for granted the compiler will do this for integer division, we may forget that when dividing signed numbers, we may get the compiler producing code like this
Apparently, there's a bug in Microsoft's IIS server that causes corruption when attempting to resume large downloads. FileZilla does not take this into account, and as a result, the download is corrupted. Clearly, this is Microsoft's fault, but the situation is that there are many buggy IIS servers out there, and Filezilla, by not having a workaround for this (other FTP clients do have a workaround), ends up corrupting the download. After looking at this ticket, it shows that the developer clearly does not live in the real world.
Personally, this issue hasn't affected me, but the exchange I linked to tells me a lot about the attitude of the developer. I only even discovered this issue when reading about FileZilla.
Then eBay will be full of charlatans preying on gullible religious people. If they enhance the Jesus-like properties of a burnt spot on a piece of toast, at least when they deliver the toast and the customer is not satisfied, they will still be able to point out similarities between the burnt spot and a more Jesus-like blob as shown in the photo.
One possible way of establishing frames of reference (eg. trying to explain the taste of an orange to someone who's never tasted a citrus fruit) is to figure out how to manually stimulate neurons (this does not necessarily involve brain-implants - maybe this can be done purely by meditation or something) and finding out which ones to stimulate for oranges and generic citrus fruit. Then, we could develop vocabulary that can be used to generalise combinations of simulated neurons, and from there, build a platform to intellectually venture deep into the realm of the psychedelic.
I mentioned in the parent-post that an atomic unit of a psychedelic experience might be a surreal juxtaposition. Maybe it's actually trying out something completely new for the first time (eg. a citrus fruit), or even something slightly new (eg. an Orange if you've already had another Citrus fruit), but this may just create a new memory rather than attempt to shift the train of thought outside of standard thought-patterns, so it will just be chalked up as a new experience rather than a psychedelic experience.
I've never taken any psychedelics myself (so I guess you could call me a psychedelic layperson), but have read several experiences from people who have. One of the things my brain tends to do during it's 'down-time' is to try and interpret these experiences (from the point of view of someone who's not had any first-hand psychedelic experiences) and using my knowledge of neural networks and other geeky things, to try and figure out what is really going on, and hopefully in the process, to figure out the nature of conciousness. I expect this is something I'm almost certainly not going to achieve by myself and it may take several generations until a purely intellectual link is found between the experiences of a deep trip and the realm of scientific and philosophic explanation. Basically, this is attempting to solve the problem by approaching it from the other end. People like Terence McKenna try their best to bring back what they experienced on their trips, but are limited by the lack of established concepts related to what they saw - hence they don't have the tools to properly communicate these things. Because of this, their interpretations tend to focus more on the spiritual side of things than the intellectual side. What people on this side of the 'psychedelic divide' are doing is to try and construct the prerequisite concepts required to properly interpret the ramblings of Terence McKenna
After reading the comments to this Slashdot article and comments posted on the linked articles, some people say it's the closest to a trip they've ever experienced on a purely visual level. Because the article attempts to make sense of what is going on, this could be an important step in developing means of communicating the content of the psychedelic realm. We could also see implications at the other end and figure out exactly what the brain does when tripping - a gold-mine of information for understanding how the brain works.
One thing I've often wondered: what is an antomic unit of a psychedelic experience? My current theory is that any surreal juxtaposition that can break the mind out of the boundaries imposed by the Sapir–Whorf hypothesis could end up displacing the mind in an unknown state, and possibly even create a feedback-loop trying to make sense of it. Perhaps when tripping, the mind is automatically bombarded by so many of these experiences that they may end up gaining insight into the Ultimate Secret of the Universe. Perhaps this is what people who are 'trying to find God' are trying to find. So we could say that God is hiding behind a certain yet-to-be-entertained juxtaposition.
Can someone who's actually had a trip please confirm if I'm on to something, or if I'm just talking out my arse?
Does anyone know if these images can be created in real-time? If so, demo-coders will pounce on the algorithm and have an absolute field-day! Demos will never quite be the same again. Another idea could be an easter-egg for a video-game where if the player has just ended a very intense gaming-session, the visuals of the frontend (even if only the background) could have this algorithm applied to them just to see if the player notices anything out of the ordinary (after a particularly intense session, this will be harder to spot immediately).
I know that training a neural network can take a very long time, but using it to recognise images can be done very quickly. If a standard CPU or GPU cannot do this in realtime, would the more dedicated demo-coders start creating their own FGASs / ASICs that are designed just for this task, and bringing their creations along to demoparties?
Slashdot Mirror
Animated Gifs are quite common nowadays - often being used as 'reaction-images' in forums and social media. In fact, the Millennials call any moving image that isn't a 'video' a 'Gif'. Their main limitation is that they are limited to 8 bits per pixel (with a palette) - hence 256 colours. Seeing that nowadays, just about everyone uses 24-bit colour, the MNG and APNG formats did not take off despite having been around for more than 10 years (IIRC, Mozilla deliberately decided to drop MNG from their browser back in 2003(?) for reasons unknown to myself). An image such as this satisfying animation of tea being poured would look a lot better if it wasn't limited to 256 colours. I really hope that whoever created it kept the source-material.
https://xkcd.com/949/
...of how organizations are resistant to change. They say that despite it's increased efficiency, organizations are inherently resistant to change, and use the DVORAK keyboard as an example when training management consultants.
that everything will have the colour #FFFFFF, which means everything will be invisible.
This reminds me of the Douglas Adams novel "Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency" when an electric monk got stuck because he believed everything was pink and therefore everything was indistinguishable from everything else, so he got stuck because he couldn't 'see' any obstacles, until he stopped believing it.
IIRC, back in the '90s, Hormel Foods (the company that made Spam) tried to sue a few websites that referred to junk mail as Spam or used Spam in such a context. Presumably, they were worried that this would give their product/brand a negative association. Unfortunately, like many of their contemporaries, they did not quite 'get' Internet-Culture. Perhaps this explains why many e-mail programs now refer to it as "Junk-Mail" instead of "Spam". I'm wondering if anyone did a study to see if Spam's association with junk e-mails had a positive or negative impact on the canned meat.
Am I the only one still in 2018 who whenever I install a new webbrowser, one of the first things I do is to turn the default background colour back to mosaic-grey? I cannot remember the precise colour code, but I suspect #C0C0C0 (192, 192, 192) is a good approximation. The reason I do this is so that any plaintext file looks just like I'm used to seeing it when I see it through a web-browser. Likewise, any HTML document without the colours defined would look like how HTML documents looked like before Netscape let you chnge the background[-colour].
One of the things I discover is that people always assume the default text is black and default background is white. Which means that if someone wants to change the text-colour, they may forget about the background colour, and their choice of text-colour may not work so well on grey as on white. Another annoying thing is that some people place transparent images with anti-aliasing and one-bit transparency working on the assumption that the text will blend into a white background. If the background is grey, it looks like the text has a white halo with a jagged edge. BTW I'm not sure if CSS lets you anti-alias text to an arbitrary colour, or if I'm only seeing this with 1-bit transparent images.
>The primary concern will be meaning and purpose
I keep hearing this when the topic of Universal Basic Income pops up. Do we really have such little imagination that we cannot think about what to do if we no longer have to find a job? Make art. Get a hobby. Make art. Start an open-source project. Make art. Make a thing. Make art. Make art. Make art. Remember. the 'Earth' without 'Art' is just 'Eh'.
But Neural Networks can be built using a Turing Machine. While such a neural network can never develop sentience, it is possible for it to develop intuition, which is basically just a form of pattern-recognition.
We need to stamp out the last remnants of the Protestant Work Ethic
>We're going to have to shake this mindset that people need to work hard to be prosperous and those who aren't prosperous haven't worked hard. Once we can do that, and ironically this is the core of christian belief, we can design social systems which provide for everyone, regardless of their situation or whether or not they want to improve it or help others.
Ironically, the Protestant work ethic is associated with the "core of Christian belief".
>Fix these issues, and in my younger years I might have well taken a couple of long-shots. Who knows what might have come of that?
Of course, with UBI in place, you can do that in your older years too. GO! GO!! GO!!!
...or just "Windows Classic".
Perhaps they could do what WinAmp did when it's users were displeased with 3.0, and made 5.0 which was the best features of 2.0 and 3.0 combines -> 2+3=5 hence 5.0. Likewise, Microsoft could release Windows 17.
PS. I still use Windows 7, but miss the Windows 2000 UI and search-feature. Windows 2010 anyone?
Perhaps this could be used to discover new Hypothetical types of biochemistry and we can then speculate about many more types of alternative biochemistries ("life as we don't know it").
At least that was a proper keyboard with pressable keys and all. Each key had it's own display.
I don't think he's using the upscaler to get the framerate right, he's using it to convert 480i (576i?) to 1080i(p?). I have no idea why he insists on up-scaling the video to a resolution that's not an exact multiple of 480/576 - afterall, if you put the video at the source-resolution on Youtube, the viewers can choose whether or not to view it at fullscreen (whose resolution varies according to which monitor is displaying it) or in a window at it's original resolution, and the upscaling will be done at the receiving end. If someone has a 720p monitor, they will end up watching a down-scaled version of an up-scaled video.
Also, about the framerate, IIRC, standard PAL VHS tapes record video at 25Hz instead of 50fps, and in doing so, somehow merge two 50Hz interlaced frames into one 25Hz non-interlaced frame. If he was digitizing directly from broadcast television or some other video-source that runs at 50Hz interlaced, I can understand why he'd want a 50Hz video, but from VHS, I'd only recommend 25Hz.
Maybe his video-grabber setup only accepts HDMI input, and he's got a device for converting analogue video (eg. composite video) into a digital HDMI signal, but for some reason, his device insists on upscaling everything to 1080p. I myself have a SCART-to-HDMI device which I use to display the output of some of my old computers on a monitor that takes HDMI input, but unfortunately, it only seems to work properly at 60Hz even though it claims to be able to cope with 50Hz (thankfully, my old computers can also be told to output 60Hz instead of 50Hz).
But that would imply any Turing-Complete machine would be concious, as it can be attached to sensors, make decisions based on what it senses (and it's internal state), and react according to an algorithm. As any programmable computer can be abstracted to a basic Turing-Complete machine, it is relatively easy to determine whether or not the simplest form of a Turing-Complete machine can be concious (sentient) or not. Even neural-networks can run in software on a Turing-complete machine, so if we can prove that Turing-Complete machines are non-sentient, then we can conclude that any neural-network that can be emulated 100% in Software on a general-purpouse computing platform is not concious.
You can get the Pacemaker plugin for WinAmp to do just that - https://www.surina.net/pacemaker/
Microsoft's own telemetry and research has shown that...
The problem is that a lot of power-users have turned off telemetry, so any telemetry that gets sent to Microsoft is biased against power-users.
While making things easier to learn for new users is a good thing(tm), please don't take away already-existing features that we've become used to.
Pretty much this. Since Windows XP, Microsoft seems to be deliberately trying to sabotage desktop search. If you want to search just for a particular file (or set of files) using just their names, and not their contents, Microsoft are doing everything they can to get in your way. In Windows Vista, you had to select the search-filter from a drop-down list to say you were only interested in searching filenames. In Windows 7, they reduced the search-filters to just "Date modified" and "Size", and if you wanted more, you had to memorise the filter-name so you could type it out by hand. Thank goodness for utilities such as FileSearchEX and Search Everything. Before I discovered either of these, I sometimes had to resort to sharing the folder I wanted to search in, and plug a Windows 2000 machine on the network just to search for something. I've not used Windows 8 or 10 much, and when I did, I used Search Everything. Has the search of 8 and 10 become even worse, or did the Windows encrappyfying team move on to the UI instead?
Back in the deep mists of time, every programmer worth their salt knew that division was an expensive operation. If they were lucky, the numbers they would have to divide by would be a power of two, and doing so requires a single shift instead of a divide. Back in the day, compilers did not automatically substitute division by a power of two with a shift, and if you were reading sourcecode, you could tell that the programmer knew their stuff if they wrote "x>>1" instead of "x/2".
Then along came optimizing compilers, that were smart enough to know what you were trying to do, and for unsigned integers they would automatically substitute the divide with a shift. Soon after, people stopped writing a shift and just wrote a divide instead, trusting the compiler to do so and in the process, making the code easier to read.
A newer generation of programmers came along, and noticed nothing 'unoptimized' about division by constant powers of two, so they just took it for granted, and were completely unaware of this trick. However, one consequence of this is if picking an arbitrary number to divide by, if they don't choose a power of two, the compiler can no longer do the abovementioned optimization. It used to be the case that arbitrary choices of numbers were powers of two, but not anymore. In fact, if books that had the potential to be turned into video-games were written bearing in mind this optimization, we may see some top-level title-changes. For example, instead if calling it 50 Shades of Grey, E.L. James should have called it Sixty Four Shades of Grey, and if someone tried to compile it, they'd end up with a somewhat faster game.
Also, if we take for granted the compiler will do this for integer division, we may forget that when dividing signed numbers, we may get the compiler producing code like this
(x>0 ? x>>1 : x/2 )
Apparently, there's a bug in Microsoft's IIS server that causes corruption when attempting to resume large downloads. FileZilla does not take this into account, and as a result, the download is corrupted. Clearly, this is Microsoft's fault, but the situation is that there are many buggy IIS servers out there, and Filezilla, by not having a workaround for this (other FTP clients do have a workaround), ends up corrupting the download. After looking at this ticket, it shows that the developer clearly does not live in the real world.
Personally, this issue hasn't affected me, but the exchange I linked to tells me a lot about the attitude of the developer. I only even discovered this issue when reading about FileZilla.
So is this fork going to address this issue?
Then eBay will be full of charlatans preying on gullible religious people. If they enhance the Jesus-like properties of a burnt spot on a piece of toast, at least when they deliver the toast and the customer is not satisfied, they will still be able to point out similarities between the burnt spot and a more Jesus-like blob as shown in the photo.
But it could have great implications in the ongoing quest to reverse engineer the psychedelic experience on a purely intellectual level.
I think this comment on another article is of relevance here.
One possible way of establishing frames of reference (eg. trying to explain the taste of an orange to someone who's never tasted a citrus fruit) is to figure out how to manually stimulate neurons (this does not necessarily involve brain-implants - maybe this can be done purely by meditation or something) and finding out which ones to stimulate for oranges and generic citrus fruit. Then, we could develop vocabulary that can be used to generalise combinations of simulated neurons, and from there, build a platform to intellectually venture deep into the realm of the psychedelic.
I mentioned in the parent-post that an atomic unit of a psychedelic experience might be a surreal juxtaposition. Maybe it's actually trying out something completely new for the first time (eg. a citrus fruit), or even something slightly new (eg. an Orange if you've already had another Citrus fruit), but this may just create a new memory rather than attempt to shift the train of thought outside of standard thought-patterns, so it will just be chalked up as a new experience rather than a psychedelic experience.
I've never taken any psychedelics myself (so I guess you could call me a psychedelic layperson), but have read several experiences from people who have. One of the things my brain tends to do during it's 'down-time' is to try and interpret these experiences (from the point of view of someone who's not had any first-hand psychedelic experiences) and using my knowledge of neural networks and other geeky things, to try and figure out what is really going on, and hopefully in the process, to figure out the nature of conciousness. I expect this is something I'm almost certainly not going to achieve by myself and it may take several generations until a purely intellectual link is found between the experiences of a deep trip and the realm of scientific and philosophic explanation. Basically, this is attempting to solve the problem by approaching it from the other end. People like Terence McKenna try their best to bring back what they experienced on their trips, but are limited by the lack of established concepts related to what they saw - hence they don't have the tools to properly communicate these things. Because of this, their interpretations tend to focus more on the spiritual side of things than the intellectual side. What people on this side of the 'psychedelic divide' are doing is to try and construct the prerequisite concepts required to properly interpret the ramblings of Terence McKenna
After reading the comments to this Slashdot article and comments posted on the linked articles, some people say it's the closest to a trip they've ever experienced on a purely visual level. Because the article attempts to make sense of what is going on, this could be an important step in developing means of communicating the content of the psychedelic realm. We could also see implications at the other end and figure out exactly what the brain does when tripping - a gold-mine of information for understanding how the brain works.
One thing I've often wondered: what is an antomic unit of a psychedelic experience? My current theory is that any surreal juxtaposition that can break the mind out of the boundaries imposed by the Sapir–Whorf hypothesis could end up displacing the mind in an unknown state, and possibly even create a feedback-loop trying to make sense of it. Perhaps when tripping, the mind is automatically bombarded by so many of these experiences that they may end up gaining insight into the Ultimate Secret of the Universe. Perhaps this is what people who are 'trying to find God' are trying to find. So we could say that God is hiding behind a certain yet-to-be-entertained juxtaposition.
Can someone who's actually had a trip please confirm if I'm on to something, or if I'm just talking out my arse?
Does anyone know if these images can be created in real-time? If so, demo-coders will pounce on the algorithm and have an absolute field-day! Demos will never quite be the same again. Another idea could be an easter-egg for a video-game where if the player has just ended a very intense gaming-session, the visuals of the frontend (even if only the background) could have this algorithm applied to them just to see if the player notices anything out of the ordinary (after a particularly intense session, this will be harder to spot immediately).
I know that training a neural network can take a very long time, but using it to recognise images can be done very quickly. If a standard CPU or GPU cannot do this in realtime, would the more dedicated demo-coders start creating their own FGASs / ASICs that are designed just for this task, and bringing their creations along to demoparties?