But why wouldn't those benevolent alien overlords help humans realize how empty the space really is, how fast looks-like-a-dot-until-too-late objects are moving, how navigational computer sorting through possible transfer orbits within mass & fuel budget is the way to go?
Or they won't remember / it will be the fault of predecessor and those damn eurocommies. The effects will be of course memorable... but so will their "causes" / look above / repeat ad nauseam.
Last time it happened, it didn't took many years for a major power to fall prey of extremist demagogues.
Please tell me you're not that naive... (though how you apparently believe the few righteous, while blaming "them", might be one of the best explanations of "death spiral")
What is actually incorrect about Palin saying if Russian airplanes were ever to attack they's be coming over Alaska?
You're not serious, right? I mean, somebody serious wouldn't even know where to start...
Generally, for one thing, you don't perform the most "obvious" plan that can pop into mind even of someone like Palin. For the other - directing airplanes, stationed along most of the Arctic coast, for a huge detour towards such narrow corridor suggests inability to grasp map projections, how our planet is almost a sphere - not to mention apparently basing defense scenarios around the most moronic actions a hypothetical enemy could make (surely a fabulous sign for somebody striving to be ubercommander of armed forces...)
Remember the cold war was not that long ago, she grew up with it.
Ahh, yes, the Red Scare was such a wonderful example of intellectual rigor.
If she knew anything about Chukotski Peninsula and northeast of Russia in general, she would also know how it doesn't make a difference if the distance is 100, 200 or 1000 km (that's assuming the point is anything except fear-mongering)
But you know... go ahead, worship her. Russia, among few, can't wait for such a disaster happening to the US.
You have no idea what you're talking about. You cannot fix, by deep focus during shooting, the requirement to maintain focus lock of eyes, on the screen, while watching (when some object in front or behind that fixed depth triggers refocusing response in the brain - which can't be avoided, being the whole point of stereoscopy (not "3D"))
Funny how you seem to be even not aware about lack of natural parallax in stereoscopy - somehow understandable, considering how all-pervasive it is. But completely lacking / wrong in "3D" photos or movies.
Your suggestion for sure causes less eyestrain than trying to focus on any random part of the scene, but it doesn't eliminate it.
Because, in reality, to have a somehow decent experience your eyes must have a physical focus lock, on the screen. You actually can't focus on what the video is focusing on. All the while apparent focus constantly changes, and parallax is simply wrong.
Supposedly cats are also adaptive enough to quickly learn using a type of purring which triggers preferable responses in humans... How early the Egyptians worshiped them suggests factors other than human evolution.
Plus you know, not much point in a friendly cat without agriculture in the first place.
Reality has a properly working parallax. And doesn't force fixing your eyes at one focus depth while the scene just wants to "appear" like it's refocusing.
Eyes must be strained though; yeah, crossing of the eyes is what they are supposed to do - but forcing them to remain focuses the same way. All with a parallax that is not merely nonexistent - it's there, but totally wrong.
Stereoscopy (not "3D"...) had its golden era in the 50s BTW, with essentially the same tech. Stereoscopic photography is 3 times older than that, not much younger than "normal" one.
Did you make even one such photo? Know anybody who did?
BTW, something in our modern lives does contribute to shortsightedness of juveniles (the effect is quite striking, when some society starts to live "modern life"). But go ahead, disturb more the development of visual systems, to which it adapted over few hundred million years...
In other words - for "normal" TV/etc. - as far as the eyes are concerned - it's like watching... a fairly flat wall. Not for the visual processing part of the brain of course (that shouldn't matter much, considering how many different spatial arrangements - including illusion / impossible arrangements - it can interpret), but there's nothing particularly weird for parts which control the eyes, and for the eyes themselves.
Now consider stereoscopy (NOT "3D"!) - as you say yourself, one aspect of eye must work as if it were one type of scenario (a scene with depth) - but different aspect must work like for a flat wall. The situation is fairly dissimilar from "normal" depth perception. Oh, and the parallax - it's not just incomplete / nonexistent (as in flat images), it's utterly wrong. It not only stimulates (stresses, I would say) the visual system "more dynamically than a regular movie would" - it does so more than real 3D scene. In a fairly new way. One to which no visual system was ever adapting over the hundreds millions of years, in all of our ancestors.
Yes, stereoscopy toys are available for a long time. In fact, one golden era of such movies was in 50s. Even better - "3D" sister of photography is only few years older than its sibling, both at ~150 years. How for most of this time stereoscopy remained mostly a gimmick speaks best for itself, IMHO. For photography, it is fairly easy and inexpensive to do for a long, long time... now, did you ever make even one such photo? Do you know anybody who did?
The problem is exactly how many things are now very well established as ordinary, but shouldn't be...
It's revealing how you accept them, though. Be happy about you honest, hardworking, efficient job which obviously in your case contributes to democracy and freedom (and for a very fair price, considering how essential the item is); about past lies giving it purpose. Any abuses are surely elsewhere in the society at large and, mostly reflecting it, system of governance...
Civil Servants are as much if not more important to keep an eye on *because* they aren't directly responsible to the citizenry! In fact on of the biggest problem with the military industrial complex is that the companies and career staff don't feel like they are beholden to the chain of command because if they can just wait them out they will go away.
It goes further than that. How many people (plus families) have staked their lives on continuing "prosperity" of either side of the complex?
Something like 85% (IIRC) of our forces deployed in Iraq still thought in 2006 - after 3 years of hard, hard searching for justification - that the place was involved in 9/11; wanted to believe that hard in past lies giving them purpose - but of course they stand on the guard of democracy, freedom, etc. Ask any common engineer or worker involved on the industrial side, and naturally it turns out their company has only honest & hardworking people; it functions in an efficient, transparent way, giving fair price for an essential items - any abuses are obviously elsewhere.
System of governance largely just reflects the above, of what the society is.
Well, you know how it goes - all it needs is one replication error, one malfunctioning / rogue lineage;p (that's how life works; and such probes would be arguably alive). If we were to assume such probes are widespread enough in the galaxy to be present in our (stellar) vicinity, that probably strongly points to the possibility of just one of them which started to multiply uncontrollably (in vicinity or not, doesn't matter much) already(*).
The point with Eris BTW was also precisely how it's unremarkable; what's really strange in this system is the third planet. Might be universally curious enough to warrant taking a much closer look (but again, dangerously close to Daniken or UFOs;) )
(*)which is the ultimate extension of something which might very well be a rule - astronomical observatories should form just a small part of industrial output. All of it should still only rarely give something immediately weird. But "out of control" self-replicating spacecraft/life - if such thing were to exist, there's probably a high chance of large proportion of stars giving unnatural spectra already (if not comets, locally)
Too bad we have a philia of large numbers next to HP - hence small diesels apparently "need to" be turbocharged nowadays.
Which isn't that much of an improvement in practice, for a type of engines which already had good torque at wide range of RPM. Can add a bit of a turbo lag, actually. It does add lots of complexity and opportunities for costly failures. New tech often not going towards improvements of fuel economy per se, but maintaining it at a mostly constant level while giving higher number next to HP.
I shudder for the day when Fabia with VW SDI engine stops being viable.
That just seems like more excuses. I have a hard time believing that US is the only place in semi-developed world where nobody figured out (during public works in last 3 decades or so; coax would be probably within that timeline) how you can...put...cables...inside pipes (small diameter one, typically made from moderately flexible plastic); which can be "laid", as a last resort, by a machine capable of mostly horizontal drilling (under a road, for example)
Slashdot Mirror
But why wouldn't those benevolent alien overlords help humans realize how empty the space really is, how fast looks-like-a-dot-until-too-late objects are moving, how navigational computer sorting through possible transfer orbits within mass & fuel budget is the way to go?
Or they won't remember / it will be the fault of predecessor and those damn eurocommies. The effects will be of course memorable ... but so will their "causes" / look above / repeat ad nauseam.
Last time it happened, it didn't took many years for a major power to fall prey of extremist demagogues.
Please tell me you're not that naive... (though how you apparently believe the few righteous, while blaming "them", might be one of the best explanations of "death spiral")
She mostly gives (appearing acceptable, to the group) a face to already quite coherent group...
Why such style of governance can't be simply a reflection of society? (styles of governance, generally speaking, are)
What is actually incorrect about Palin saying if Russian airplanes were ever to attack they's be coming over Alaska?
You're not serious, right? I mean, somebody serious wouldn't even know where to start...
Generally, for one thing, you don't perform the most "obvious" plan that can pop into mind even of someone like Palin. For the other - directing airplanes, stationed along most of the Arctic coast, for a huge detour towards such narrow corridor suggests inability to grasp map projections, how our planet is almost a sphere - not to mention apparently basing defense scenarios around the most moronic actions a hypothetical enemy could make (surely a fabulous sign for somebody striving to be ubercommander of armed forces...)
Remember the cold war was not that long ago, she grew up with it.
Ahh, yes, the Red Scare was such a wonderful example of intellectual rigor.
If she knew anything about Chukotski Peninsula and northeast of Russia in general, she would also know how it doesn't make a difference if the distance is 100, 200 or 1000 km (that's assuming the point is anything except fear-mongering)
But you know... go ahead, worship her. Russia, among few, can't wait for such a disaster happening to the US.
You have no idea what you're talking about. You cannot fix, by deep focus during shooting, the requirement to maintain focus lock of eyes, on the screen, while watching (when some object in front or behind that fixed depth triggers refocusing response in the brain - which can't be avoided, being the whole point of stereoscopy (not "3D"))
Funny how you seem to be even not aware about lack of natural parallax in stereoscopy - somehow understandable, considering how all-pervasive it is. But completely lacking / wrong in "3D" photos or movies.
Your suggestion for sure causes less eyestrain than trying to focus on any random part of the scene, but it doesn't eliminate it.
Because, in reality, to have a somehow decent experience your eyes must have a physical focus lock, on the screen. You actually can't focus on what the video is focusing on. All the while apparent focus constantly changes, and parallax is simply wrong.
Supposedly cats are also adaptive enough to quickly learn using a type of purring which triggers preferable responses in humans... How early the Egyptians worshiped them suggests factors other than human evolution.
Plus you know, not much point in a friendly cat without agriculture in the first place.
Faux depth perception in emptiness? Intriguing...
You mean those gimmicky toys fun for a few days, tops, and then mostly collecting dust?
Reality has a properly working parallax. And doesn't force fixing your eyes at one focus depth while the scene just wants to "appear" like it's refocusing.
"Thousands" of years of human development and evolution? Shouldn't you know better, in medical field? ;p
Eyes must be strained though; yeah, crossing of the eyes is what they are supposed to do - but forcing them to remain focuses the same way. All with a parallax that is not merely nonexistent - it's there, but totally wrong.
Stereoscopy (not "3D"...) had its golden era in the 50s BTW, with essentially the same tech. Stereoscopic photography is 3 times older than that, not much younger than "normal" one.
Did you make even one such photo? Know anybody who did?
BTW, something in our modern lives does contribute to shortsightedness of juveniles (the effect is quite striking, when some society starts to live "modern life"). But go ahead, disturb more the development of visual systems, to which it adapted over few hundred million years...
In other words - for "normal" TV/etc. - as far as the eyes are concerned - it's like watching ... a fairly flat wall. Not for the visual processing part of the brain of course (that shouldn't matter much, considering how many different spatial arrangements - including illusion / impossible arrangements - it can interpret), but there's nothing particularly weird for parts which control the eyes, and for the eyes themselves.
Now consider stereoscopy (NOT "3D"!) - as you say yourself, one aspect of eye must work as if it were one type of scenario (a scene with depth) - but different aspect must work like for a flat wall. The situation is fairly dissimilar from "normal" depth perception. Oh, and the parallax - it's not just incomplete / nonexistent (as in flat images), it's utterly wrong. It not only stimulates (stresses, I would say) the visual system "more dynamically than a regular movie would" - it does so more than real 3D scene. In a fairly new way. One to which no visual system was ever adapting over the hundreds millions of years, in all of our ancestors.
Yes, stereoscopy toys are available for a long time. In fact, one golden era of such movies was in 50s. Even better - "3D" sister of photography is only few years older than its sibling, both at ~150 years. How for most of this time stereoscopy remained mostly a gimmick speaks best for itself, IMHO. For photography, it is fairly easy and inexpensive to do for a long, long time... now, did you ever make even one such photo? Do you know anybody who did?
Such career path isn't intentionally chosen?
The problem is exactly how many things are now very well established as ordinary, but shouldn't be...
It's revealing how you accept them, though. Be happy about you honest, hardworking, efficient job which obviously in your case contributes to democracy and freedom (and for a very fair price, considering how essential the item is); about past lies giving it purpose. Any abuses are surely elsewhere in the society at large and, mostly reflecting it, system of governance...
it hurts too many people who were doing an acceptable job, and triggers "us versus them" reactions
Oh, hello mister Good German!
Civil Servants are as much if not more important to keep an eye on *because* they aren't directly responsible to the citizenry! In fact on of the biggest problem with the military industrial complex is that the companies and career staff don't feel like they are beholden to the chain of command because if they can just wait them out they will go away.
It goes further than that. How many people (plus families) have staked their lives on continuing "prosperity" of either side of the complex?
Something like 85% (IIRC) of our forces deployed in Iraq still thought in 2006 - after 3 years of hard, hard searching for justification - that the place was involved in 9/11; wanted to believe that hard in past lies giving them purpose - but of course they stand on the guard of democracy, freedom, etc. Ask any common engineer or worker involved on the industrial side, and naturally it turns out their company has only honest & hardworking people; it functions in an efficient, transparent way, giving fair price for an essential items - any abuses are obviously elsewhere.
System of governance largely just reflects the above, of what the society is.
Well, you know how it goes - all it needs is one replication error, one malfunctioning / rogue lineage ;p (that's how life works; and such probes would be arguably alive). If we were to assume such probes are widespread enough in the galaxy to be present in our (stellar) vicinity, that probably strongly points to the possibility of just one of them which started to multiply uncontrollably (in vicinity or not, doesn't matter much) already(*).
The point with Eris BTW was also precisely how it's unremarkable; what's really strange in this system is the third planet. Might be universally curious enough to warrant taking a much closer look (but again, dangerously close to Daniken or UFOs ;) )
(*)which is the ultimate extension of something which might very well be a rule - astronomical observatories should form just a small part of industrial output. All of it should still only rarely give something immediately weird. But "out of control" self-replicating spacecraft/life - if such thing were to exist, there's probably a high chance of large proportion of stars giving unnatural spectra already (if not comets, locally)
Too bad we have a philia of large numbers next to HP - hence small diesels apparently "need to" be turbocharged nowadays.
Which isn't that much of an improvement in practice, for a type of engines which already had good torque at wide range of RPM. Can add a bit of a turbo lag, actually. It does add lots of complexity and opportunities for costly failures. New tech often not going towards improvements of fuel economy per se, but maintaining it at a mostly constant level while giving higher number next to HP.
I shudder for the day when Fabia with VW SDI engine stops being viable.
Yes, it's a harder work (also from the battery, I would imagine) to start a diesel.
You have cowboy competition right now. Owners of biggest ranches make the rules.
Systems of governance are largely just a reflection of that (and of societies, generally)
That just seems like more excuses. I have a hard time believing that US is the only place in semi-developed world where nobody figured out (during public works in last 3 decades or so; coax would be probably within that timeline) how you can...put...cables...inside pipes (small diameter one, typically made from moderately flexible plastic); which can be "laid", as a last resort, by a machine capable of mostly horizontal drilling (under a road, for example)