I think they agreed to commend efforts to promote and enhance public safety and consumer awareness on the proper bonding of yellow corrugated stainless steel tubing.
I mean, it's not like they're just dicking around over there.
I assume Kinect2 will be 720p, or at least 640x480 in the depth buffer. I didn't actually count the dots, but the image in the article looks like it's 320x240. Unless Kinect2's sole improvement is higher framerates (including or achieved with onboard processing, perhaps), this looks like the same old thing. At most, it looks like someone is rendering the output of a normal Kinect with their only special bit of test software or something. It's really just an incredibly unremarkable image.
I don't think he's saying we should give up on reducing that number. I think he's saying it may technically have been avoidable in that case. It's not meant to be dismissive. It's meant to be food for thought.
OnLive has been "coming to" iOS for like two years now. They've had pictures of iPads floating around their site for ages, and I think there's an E3 video of someone using it. What have they actually produced? OnLive Viewer. So you am watch strangers play a game that you can't play.
It's an impressive service, but they should probably keep their eye on the ball and get it onto popular systems that have the important benefit of actually existing.
Partisan gridlock is not the problem parties would like us to believe it is. On abortion, or gay marriage, or taxes sure. But they're always ready to work, hand in hand, to re-authorize the Patriot Act, throw money at the middle east, or commend efforts to promote and enhance public safety on the need for yellow corrugated stainless steel tubing bonding.
I had Shenmue II for the Xbox, for some reason. The game starts with you getting off of a boat n a cutscene. Walking forward five feet along the dock triggers a cutscene. I actually really liked the game, but they probably should have just rolled those two cinematics together.
Dead-center helps, but as long as both eyes are the same distance from dead-center, changing the scale can be very enjoyable. I would never take a stereo pair of a mountain with views separated by the same distance as my eyes, but a stereo pair of a mountain can be incredibly beautiful.
Prometheus was fookin' gorgeous in 3D. I generally keep my weather eye open for tacky usage of 3D in movies, but Prometheus just felt like a normal movie that happened to be in 3D. It added a lot to the experience, for me.
Of course it is. The number of views used to create the effect is limited, but guess what: we live in a quantum universe. The number of views from which you can view an actual object in the real world is vast, but finite.
My own personal experimentation was with iz3d's 3D drivers. They allow you to adjust parallax and convegence to nonsensical levels, and I realized one day that if I ran it in "dual projector" mode and adjusted the convergence outward, I might be able to simulatemhaving two different viewports.
Unfortunately, they don't produce the second view by changing the rendering angle... All they do is translate points parallel to the monitor plane depending on depth. It's was interesting to learn and explains why bump and parallax maps don't work under their drivers... because they are rendered from the same angle to begin with. If bump and parallax maps are 3D on NVidia's stereo drivers, they may be doing things right.
I think most game engines also unload/skip geometry that's behind you, too, so if you trying to retrofit current games using GPU tech could result in a lot of empty voids or untextured geometry in your side screens. Or maybe it's the GPU deciding to skip it. I'm not a scientist.
No, I'm just a man. A man who wants games to look better. But who do we petition? And who will join our cause? It's absurd that I. An render something as gorgeous as GTA4, but can't project it correctly onto three walls. This should be the basic stuff we sorted out ten years ago.
Unfortunately, games don't render correctly for angled monitors or curved screens. Curved screens would be particularly tricky to implement. Where having multiple sparate views would make sens for monitors (but isn't supported yet), a curved screen would require curved lines of perspective, which sounds like the fevered dream of a madman.
Angling your displays is mathematically incorrect. Distortion will only be resolved placing them in a single plane an making sure your FOV matches the arc the monitors take up.
Is anyone there working on correcting perspective for extra monitors for a single player? I'm sure game developers would bear some of the burden, but it seems like driver support could make it a lot easier to do.
All I have is an old iz3d monitor with heavy ghosting, and rampant artifacts, and I find 3D gaming to be much more enjoyable than multi-screen. I'm certainly not shilling for their monitors, because I think they are now out of the hardware business.
If you are playing 3D FPSs or RPGs, all monitors should be aligned in a single plane wth its center directly in front of you. Then either FOV should be adjusted until it matches the angle the monitors actually occupy, or you should adjust your distance to the center-pint until the monitors occupy an angle equal to your FOV.
Being at the center of an arc of monitors is mathematically incorrect, and makes distortion worse than it has to be.
Apologies to everyone, by the way, for crapping all over the commenatry for this article. I swore several months ago to male it my life's mission to badmiuth multi-monitor gaming aggressively until NVidia or ATI, or possibly game companies (I'm not quite sure who is in the best position...) fix its horrific shortcomings.
I've been waiting for the issue to come up again, but I was late to the party, and I'm now working at double-capacity spewing vitriol for grotesquely distorted graphics, several-thousand-dollar multi-panel screens that incorrectly angle the peripheral screens (making anything displayed on them look worse), and GPU marketing campaigns that border on fraud.
As long as you are buying six screens, and doing it purely for the ludicrous number of pixels. If you are planning on using three sceens for a wrap-around experience, the distortion on the peripheral monitors is going to make you very sad about the money you've spent. While support for the physical monitors themselves is now excellent, support for the rendering of multi-monitor games has, if anything, regressed.
This is why multi-monitor gaming is garbage. None of thes wonderful/necessary ideas are supported (except bevel compensation).
Apart from incredibly rare, fancy flight simulators, there are no games that will render a separate angle for each screen. This makes it mathematically impossible for any number of monitors to produce a 180 degree view, let alone the wrap-around or CAVE-type views they could be capable of.
The only proper arrangement for a three monitor setup is for all three to be lined up perfectly straight. Any other arrangement is geometrically incorrect in a way that is currently uncorrectable in software.
once they are positioned, you will probably also need to keep your eyes about six inches from the screen to correct for the distortion on the peripheral screens.
ATI should be embarrassed to tout multi-screen gaming when it is broken on such fundamental levels.
Preposterously oversized Manning leak aside, most government leaks tend to focus on either some kind of specific wrongdoing that the leaker came across in the normal course of business, or portray the leaker or their clique in a positive light.This leads me to two questions:
1. Can this do anything to stop those much more frequent leaks, in which people don't spend large chunks of their time executing identifiable search patterns, and simply grab a few files on the fly that catch their interest?
2. Could this process involve the deliberate creation of false incriminating documents ("the CIA is injecting babies with anthrax!") for the sole purpose of catching good, honest people that think such things should be public knowledge? Along that line of thinking, what would you actually charge a government employee with? It isn't actually a classified document, and if it is, it obviously shouldn't be. Even if you think of it as an important investigatory in and of itself for finding leakers, it is a) designed to go public, and b) being deployed willy-nilly, against no one in particular, not against a specific target frim whom there is a known threat.
It could also spawn a series of creepy trends in which a disturbing story about government wrongdoing is reported, a leaker is arrested, and the government gets to announce that it caught a naughty traitor, and by the way, we weren't really killing babies, it was just a trap to catch that naughty traitor.
After enough of those, I can imagine it getting increasingly difficult for a leaker with material of genuine concern to the public to find a reputable outlet to disseminate it. I can also imagine the bulk of the public dismissing genuine stories that reach the news as "another one of those fake leaks."
That's about all my solver actually did, if I recall correctly. I worked at a small game publisher a couple years ago, and one of my many and varied duties was game testing. We had a Brain Age clone type of game in, and I had to grind through some sudoku, which was obviously not a great use of my time. So during my lunch break, I wrote what I think amounted to a sieve.
It ran constantly when you started it, looping through the grid. Each square was represented as an array of the nine possible numbers. When an array got down to a single digit, that digit was removed from all of its square, row, and column-mates.
Then the next loop check for new squares that had been knocked down to a single digit, to repeat the process.
They were relatively easy puzzles, and I think that actually solved the bulk of them, but I did have to add a check that went a level deeper at some point.
i'm a terrible programmer, and it was a terrible program, but it was very fun to use. Because it was always running, it was actually just waiting for the user to input the starting numbers drom the puzzle. Each time you enter a starting digit, all the numbers wiggled around for a moment finding new stable values, with locked digits turning from red to green. By the time you entered the last digit, the puzzle was more or less solved, and the last few green numbers would lock into place.
if you've ever played Uplink, it was very much like an interactive "Elyptic Curve Cipher".
Adding censorship tools could aid censorship? I would guess that what's considered trolling if it's done to a comgressperson's feed is considered noble dissent it's done to a dictator who has suddenly lost popularity in the west. Will Twitter have an emal address to which one can apply for the "noble dissent" waiver?
Slashdot Mirror
I think they agreed to commend efforts to promote and enhance public safety and consumer awareness on the proper bonding of yellow corrugated stainless steel tubing.
I mean, it's not like they're just dicking around over there.
I assume Kinect2 will be 720p, or at least 640x480 in the depth buffer. I didn't actually count the dots, but the image in the article looks like it's 320x240. Unless Kinect2's sole improvement is higher framerates (including or achieved with onboard processing, perhaps), this looks like the same old thing. At most, it looks like someone is rendering the output of a normal Kinect with their only special bit of test software or something. It's really just an incredibly unremarkable image.
I don't think he's saying we should give up on reducing that number. I think he's saying it may technically have been avoidable in that case. It's not meant to be dismissive. It's meant to be food for thought.
OnLive has been "coming to" iOS for like two years now. They've had pictures of iPads floating around their site for ages, and I think there's an E3 video of someone using it. What have they actually produced? OnLive Viewer. So you am watch strangers play a game that you can't play.
It's an impressive service, but they should probably keep their eye on the ball and get it onto popular systems that have the important benefit of actually existing.
Yes, please.
Is there some reason this shouldn't go in the DocType? I'm terrible at writing valid HTML, so that's a genuine question.
Partisan gridlock is not the problem parties would like us to believe it is. On abortion, or gay marriage, or taxes sure. But they're always ready to work, hand in hand, to re-authorize the Patriot Act, throw money at the middle east, or commend efforts to promote and enhance public safety on the need for yellow corrugated stainless steel tubing bonding.
I had Shenmue II for the Xbox, for some reason. The game starts with you getting off of a boat n a cutscene. Walking forward five feet along the dock triggers a cutscene. I actually really liked the game, but they probably should have just rolled those two cinematics together.
So I can connect my Wi-Fi iPads (no GPS) to the bluetooth GPS receiver I already own.
Dead-center helps, but as long as both eyes are the same distance from dead-center, changing the scale can be very enjoyable. I would never take a stereo pair of a mountain with views separated by the same distance as my eyes, but a stereo pair of a mountain can be incredibly beautiful.
Prometheus was fookin' gorgeous in 3D. I generally keep my weather eye open for tacky usage of 3D in movies, but Prometheus just felt like a normal movie that happened to be in 3D. It added a lot to the experience, for me.
Do you currently run video at 1Hz?
Of course it is. The number of views used to create the effect is limited, but guess what: we live in a quantum universe. The number of views from which you can view an actual object in the real world is vast, but finite.
I love you. Can we start a club?
My own personal experimentation was with iz3d's 3D drivers. They allow you to adjust parallax and convegence to nonsensical levels, and I realized one day that if I ran it in "dual projector" mode and adjusted the convergence outward, I might be able to simulatemhaving two different viewports.
Unfortunately, they don't produce the second view by changing the rendering angle... All they do is translate points parallel to the monitor plane depending on depth. It's was interesting to learn and explains why bump and parallax maps don't work under their drivers... because they are rendered from the same angle to begin with. If bump and parallax maps are 3D on NVidia's stereo drivers, they may be doing things right.
I think most game engines also unload/skip geometry that's behind you, too, so if you trying to retrofit current games using GPU tech could result in a lot of empty voids or untextured geometry in your side screens. Or maybe it's the GPU deciding to skip it. I'm not a scientist.
No, I'm just a man. A man who wants games to look better. But who do we petition? And who will join our cause? It's absurd that I. An render something as gorgeous as GTA4, but can't project it correctly onto three walls. This should be the basic stuff we sorted out ten years ago.
Unfortunately, games don't render correctly for angled monitors or curved screens. Curved screens would be particularly tricky to implement. Where having multiple sparate views would make sens for monitors (but isn't supported yet), a curved screen would require curved lines of perspective, which sounds like the fevered dream of a madman.
Angling your displays is mathematically incorrect. Distortion will only be resolved placing them in a single plane an making sure your FOV matches the arc the monitors take up.
Is anyone there working on correcting perspective for extra monitors for a single player? I'm sure game developers would bear some of the burden, but it seems like driver support could make it a lot easier to do.
All I have is an old iz3d monitor with heavy ghosting, and rampant artifacts, and I find 3D gaming to be much more enjoyable than multi-screen. I'm certainly not shilling for their monitors, because I think they are now out of the hardware business.
If you are playing 3D FPSs or RPGs, all monitors should be aligned in a single plane wth its center directly in front of you. Then either FOV should be adjusted until it matches the angle the monitors actually occupy, or you should adjust your distance to the center-pint until the monitors occupy an angle equal to your FOV.
Being at the center of an arc of monitors is mathematically incorrect, and makes distortion worse than it has to be.
Also, it just looks like shit.
Apologies to everyone, by the way, for crapping all over the commenatry for this article. I swore several months ago to male it my life's mission to badmiuth multi-monitor gaming aggressively until NVidia or ATI, or possibly game companies (I'm not quite sure who is in the best position...) fix its horrific shortcomings.
I've been waiting for the issue to come up again, but I was late to the party, and I'm now working at double-capacity spewing vitriol for grotesquely distorted graphics, several-thousand-dollar multi-panel screens that incorrectly angle the peripheral screens (making anything displayed on them look worse), and GPU marketing campaigns that border on fraud.
As long as you are buying six screens, and doing it purely for the ludicrous number of pixels. If you are planning on using three sceens for a wrap-around experience, the distortion on the peripheral monitors is going to make you very sad about the money you've spent. While support for the physical monitors themselves is now excellent, support for the rendering of multi-monitor games has, if anything, regressed.
This is why multi-monitor gaming is garbage. None of thes wonderful/necessary ideas are supported (except bevel compensation).
Apart from incredibly rare, fancy flight simulators, there are no games that will render a separate angle for each screen. This makes it mathematically impossible for any number of monitors to produce a 180 degree view, let alone the wrap-around or CAVE-type views they could be capable of.
The only proper arrangement for a three monitor setup is for all three to be lined up perfectly straight. Any other arrangement is geometrically incorrect in a way that is currently uncorrectable in software.
once they are positioned, you will probably also need to keep your eyes about six inches from the screen to correct for the distortion on the peripheral screens.
ATI should be embarrassed to tout multi-screen gaming when it is broken on such fundamental levels.
Preposterously oversized Manning leak aside, most government leaks tend to focus on either some kind of specific wrongdoing that the leaker came across in the normal course of business, or portray the leaker or their clique in a positive light.This leads me to two questions:
1. Can this do anything to stop those much more frequent leaks, in which people don't spend large chunks of their time executing identifiable search patterns, and simply grab a few files on the fly that catch their interest?
2. Could this process involve the deliberate creation of false incriminating documents ("the CIA is injecting babies with anthrax!") for the sole purpose of catching good, honest people that think such things should be public knowledge? Along that line of thinking, what would you actually charge a government employee with? It isn't actually a classified document, and if it is, it obviously shouldn't be. Even if you think of it as an important investigatory in and of itself for finding leakers, it is a) designed to go public, and b) being deployed willy-nilly, against no one in particular, not against a specific target frim whom there is a known threat.
It could also spawn a series of creepy trends in which a disturbing story about government wrongdoing is reported, a leaker is arrested, and the government gets to announce that it caught a naughty traitor, and by the way, we weren't really killing babies, it was just a trap to catch that naughty traitor.
After enough of those, I can imagine it getting increasingly difficult for a leaker with material of genuine concern to the public to find a reputable outlet to disseminate it. I can also imagine the bulk of the public dismissing genuine stories that reach the news as "another one of those fake leaks."
The whole thing sounds weird.
That's about all my solver actually did, if I recall correctly. I worked at a small game publisher a couple years ago, and one of my many and varied duties was game testing. We had a Brain Age clone type of game in, and I had to grind through some sudoku, which was obviously not a great use of my time. So during my lunch break, I wrote what I think amounted to a sieve.
It ran constantly when you started it, looping through the grid. Each square was represented as an array of the nine possible numbers. When an array got down to a single digit, that digit was removed from all of its square, row, and column-mates.
Then the next loop check for new squares that had been knocked down to a single digit, to repeat the process.
They were relatively easy puzzles, and I think that actually solved the bulk of them, but I did have to add a check that went a level deeper at some point.
i'm a terrible programmer, and it was a terrible program, but it was very fun to use. Because it was always running, it was actually just waiting for the user to input the starting numbers drom the puzzle. Each time you enter a starting digit, all the numbers wiggled around for a moment finding new stable values, with locked digits turning from red to green. By the time you entered the last digit, the puzzle was more or less solved, and the last few green numbers would lock into place.
if you've ever played Uplink, it was very much like an interactive "Elyptic Curve Cipher".
Adding censorship tools could aid censorship? I would guess that what's considered trolling if it's done to a comgressperson's feed is considered noble dissent it's done to a dictator who has suddenly lost popularity in the west. Will Twitter have an emal address to which one can apply for the "noble dissent" waiver?