VR is dead, sorry. Early adopters might pay 350$ for the headset, if only they have the necessary 4000$ PC to run it. This thing is not going to be usable on a a 300$ PC/Console anytime soon. It requires 120fps per eye to not make people sick. Current mid-range video cards don't even do 60fps on a single card. So either people are going to get a poor experience because they have poor hardware, or they're going to get a visit to the hospital because the headset physically makes them sick if they make it run at anything less than 120fps.
Nope. You only need to update the headset at 120fps, not the rendered image. You can re-use/distort the same rendered image multiple times to keep the headset happy while you render the next one. It would only take a fraction of the graphics card's power to do that.
With this technique even a 30Hz scene update rate would be fine.
Meh. I stopped going to the cinema when the price of two tickets became more than the price of the DVD (and that's before you add snacks / drinks). I bought a projector and a reasonable surround-sound system almost a decade ago (and have replaced the bulb once). A subscription to a DVD rental service now costs significantly less than two people going to the cinema once a month.in the original.
Have you heard of those new high definition discs they have now? Blow-rays or something like that.
Man...are you going to freak out when you see one.
Same as if you watched it in the theatre...only less sticky. And you know who is fondling your arm.
I hope this is a joke. If you seriously believe the quality you see in a movie theater is the same as the crappy quality you get from cam/telesync copies (including the ones they label HDTS), you are very much mistaken.
I think he's referring to other people talking on their phones, walking in front of the screen, etc. The recorded experience is very similar.
I suggest having a site such that the drone controls can pull the latest 'no-fly' listing rather easily from.
Of course the public will have an op-out access as well, right? I should be able to prevent people flying drones within 100 feet of my property. Realistically it should be opt-in, not opt-out. You can opt-in your own house if you have a big enough garden to not encroach on the neighbors' space.
Public spaces? Also prohibited, obviously (are you going to pay insurance for your drone?)
The Nissan GTR does this in Japan. On normal roads it's speed-limited to 180km/h but if you enter a racetrack area it removes all restrictions automatically.
looks like somebody ran over Vader's face--not a chick magnet
It's almost as if you've never googled "star wars chicks"...
(Or been to one of those conventions where half the girls are dressed in Princess Leia outfits and the other half are dressed as the bounty hunter. With that watch you can take your pick!)
Essentially the problem is that motorists don't deal with bicyclists often, and so they don't know how to safely deal with them because they haven't put a lot of thought into the problem. As a bicyclist, you have to make it obvious to motorists what they need to do.
The other problem is that not all cyclists do this. The motorist hating in you is thinking, "the other cyclist I just passed (six inches away at 60mph) was riding in the gutter so why isn't this one doing the same?"
The learning process could be accelerated by every single cyclist riding properly (ie. in the middle of the lane).
Slashdot Mirror
Does anybody even remember why the USA thinks it was supposed to be over there?
Colin Powell, George Bush, Weapons of Mass Destruction. Long since debunked (they were knowingly lying to you)
Terrorists? You think the TSA is stopping them? LOL!
Yep. It's just another media frenzy over nothing.
How many pilots do you think it actually affects?
136 pounds is a midget...even Tom Cruise weighs more than that (169 pounds according to google)
Have you seen a doctor about that?
VR is dead, sorry. Early adopters might pay 350$ for the headset, if only they have the necessary 4000$ PC to run it. This thing is not going to be usable on a a 300$ PC/Console anytime soon. It requires 120fps per eye to not make people sick. Current mid-range video cards don't even do 60fps on a single card. So either people are going to get a poor experience because they have poor hardware, or they're going to get a visit to the hospital because the headset physically makes them sick if they make it run at anything less than 120fps.
Nope. You only need to update the headset at 120fps, not the rendered image. You can re-use/distort the same rendered image multiple times to keep the headset happy while you render the next one. It would only take a fraction of the graphics card's power to do that.
With this technique even a 30Hz scene update rate would be fine.
Are your friends insects?
You're right, this is a complete waste of time. I don't know why they bothered.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Meh. I stopped going to the cinema when the price of two tickets became more than the price of the DVD (and that's before you add snacks / drinks). I bought a projector and a reasonable surround-sound system almost a decade ago (and have replaced the bulb once). A subscription to a DVD rental service now costs significantly less than two people going to the cinema once a month.in the original.
Have you heard of those new high definition discs they have now? Blow-rays or something like that.
Man...are you going to freak out when you see one.
I agree 100%, what kind of a miserly dork would watch a pirated movie recorded with a smartphone in a cinema.
And what total idiot believes that those miserly dorks would have gone out and paid to see it if only it wasn't available on torrent sites?
Same as if you watched it in the theatre...only less sticky. And you know who is fondling your arm.
I hope this is a joke. If you seriously believe the quality you see in a movie theater is the same as the crappy quality you get from cam/telesync copies (including the ones they label HDTS), you are very much mistaken.
I think he's referring to other people talking on their phones, walking in front of the screen, etc. The recorded experience is very similar.
We don't even have the practical technology to make our own deserts places people can live,
Well... Las Vegas
Dubai
I suggest having a site such that the drone controls can pull the latest 'no-fly' listing rather easily from.
Of course the public will have an op-out access as well, right? I should be able to prevent people flying drones within 100 feet of my property. Realistically it should be opt-in, not opt-out. You can opt-in your own house if you have a big enough garden to not encroach on the neighbors' space.
Public spaces? Also prohibited, obviously (are you going to pay insurance for your drone?)
You can put a big fucking sticker on the drone, that's how. A sticker that has to be removed before it will fly.
The Nissan GTR does this in Japan. On normal roads it's speed-limited to 180km/h but if you enter a racetrack area it removes all restrictions automatically.
looks like somebody ran over Vader's face--not a chick magnet
It's almost as if you've never googled "star wars chicks"...
(Or been to one of those conventions where half the girls are dressed in Princess Leia outfits and the other half are dressed as the bounty hunter. With that watch you can take your pick!)
Most "electromechanical watches" watches don't have pulleys and rubber belts inside them.
m1 and z1 are pretty nice looking cars.
When did "attractive" become "looks"?
A BMW 1 series is never attractive.
And you won't get one at that price.
(At least , not one worth having...)
Why bother with these "supercars" when they can easily...
Very simple: Because the Australian Police can actually read an article summary on Slashdot before posting.
Oooh! A working brain. Very rare on slashdot these days.
Yeah, well Nat. Geo. TV is no gem.
It's not as bad as "History Channel".
Both. Microsoft added features to make it easy for crapware to exist.
I wonder how the automated cars are going to handle these cases?
Better than the humans, one suspects.
Essentially the problem is that motorists don't deal with bicyclists often, and so they don't know how to safely deal with them because they haven't put a lot of thought into the problem. As a bicyclist, you have to make it obvious to motorists what they need to do.
The other problem is that not all cyclists do this. The motorist hating in you is thinking, "the other cyclist I just passed (six inches away at 60mph) was riding in the gutter so why isn't this one doing the same?"
The learning process could be accelerated by every single cyclist riding properly (ie. in the middle of the lane).
How is this legal? Tricking people into paying for accounts by convincing them that someone is trying to message them would be fraud, wouldn't it?
Apparently nobody noticed.
If everybody is happy and nobody's being short-changed then it's not fraud in my book.
You haven't even imagined how the f-35 will change the battlefield. But 10 years from now you will respect it
10 years from now the F35 will be hopelessly obsolete.