I read that this commercial was entirely pre-rendered CG, not running in realtime on the 360 hardware. Disappointing considering that the E3 was running in realtime using the engine.
Glad to hear it. I had read that it was rendered by the Hollywood effects house Digital Domain, and that it was entirely CG, and my eyes agreed when it aired.
A mix of live action and CG? It looked like it was entirely CG to me. Not to say that the CG didn't look great, it did. I just don't recall any live action. Did I miss something?
Yeah, but futhermore wouldn't it be safe to say that they don't just go indict someone with charges without a gumshoe comparing the photographs themselves? I mean, theres go to be some sort of human involvement. Lets say the have a CCTV image of a buglary suspect and they use this software to scan the DMV photos for a match, and the software returns 1 or more matches. They don't just throw the match(es) in jail right then. I think its a safe bet that law enforcement would use their own peepers to compare the DMV photographs with the CCTV to see if its close, and then go about questioning the match(es) for their whereabouts..etc..looking for other evidence before going ahead with prosecution. It's obvious that this system is meant to give leads rather than 100% solve cases. Sure there are going to be false positives, it's a computer look for matches. It's more than likely that it's designed to be liberal with its matches simply to give detectives a list of a dozen possible suspects rather than the entire population of a city/town etc. Regardless, I can't say I'm entirely surprised that a slashdot editor took this chance to stir the pot on something that for the most part is cool, useful, and manages to assist law enforcement without trampling our privacy.
I was wondering the same thing. I skimmed the article but wasn't able to discern any particular reason why they would need to be nanosensors. Why couldn't we have some of Cassandra's mechanical spiders from the new Doctor Who series? Seems to me that those would work just fine, and you could fit a 9 volt battery in them, solving that problem!
Tom's Hardware is slipping.
on
DivX 6.0 is Out
·
· Score: 5, Informative
I was immensly disappointed with the Tom's Hardware article. It was incredibly shallow and vague, a significant change for them. It was more marketing/press release than it was informative and objective review or introduction. If I wanted that I would read the information on divx.com. For those of you who want a mor technical and in-depth discussion, look no further than the Doom 9 Forums
Slashdot Mirror
I read that this commercial was entirely pre-rendered CG, not running in realtime on the 360 hardware. Disappointing considering that the E3 was running in realtime using the engine.
Glad to hear it. I had read that it was rendered by the Hollywood effects house Digital Domain, and that it was entirely CG, and my eyes agreed when it aired.
A mix of live action and CG? It looked like it was entirely CG to me. Not to say that the CG didn't look great, it did. I just don't recall any live action. Did I miss something?
Yeah, but futhermore wouldn't it be safe to say that they don't just go indict someone with charges without a gumshoe comparing the photographs themselves? I mean, theres go to be some sort of human involvement. Lets say the have a CCTV image of a buglary suspect and they use this software to scan the DMV photos for a match, and the software returns 1 or more matches. They don't just throw the match(es) in jail right then. I think its a safe bet that law enforcement would use their own peepers to compare the DMV photographs with the CCTV to see if its close, and then go about questioning the match(es) for their whereabouts..etc..looking for other evidence before going ahead with prosecution. It's obvious that this system is meant to give leads rather than 100% solve cases. Sure there are going to be false positives, it's a computer look for matches. It's more than likely that it's designed to be liberal with its matches simply to give detectives a list of a dozen possible suspects rather than the entire population of a city/town etc. Regardless, I can't say I'm entirely surprised that a slashdot editor took this chance to stir the pot on something that for the most part is cool, useful, and manages to assist law enforcement without trampling our privacy.
I was wondering the same thing. I skimmed the article but wasn't able to discern any particular reason why they would need to be nanosensors. Why couldn't we have some of Cassandra's mechanical spiders from the new Doctor Who series? Seems to me that those would work just fine, and you could fit a 9 volt battery in them, solving that problem!
I was immensly disappointed with the Tom's Hardware article. It was incredibly shallow and vague, a significant change for them. It was more marketing/press release than it was informative and objective review or introduction. If I wanted that I would read the information on divx.com. For those of you who want a mor technical and in-depth discussion, look no further than the Doom 9 Forums