...forgot to mention the point: in this system we've had only 3 disk failures in the past 4 years and these were all in the RAID6 DAS arrays. Everything was rebuilt without a blip.
On one of our really old 6-disk servers we had a RAID controller fail and we lost some data, but fortunately the important stuff was properly backed up. Not to harp about it, but the people saying that RAID is not a backup are right on.
At our studio, we run several 24x500GB-drive RAID6 DAS arrays for top tier storage. The backup system is comprised of redundant NexentaStor heads with a ZFS RAID-Z virtualizing across 16 storage nodes through iSCSI, each node a 4x1TB 1U box in RAID5 (which makes a RAIDZ-55?).
The RAIDZ55 holds unstructured data plus a VTL partition, which gets a scheduled dump to LTO4 and taken offsite.
I just wouldnt want to be in the tunnels with something like that racing around held in place by magnets,
My understanding is that the tunnel area will become radioactive once the beams are active. Getting near the beams or magnets would be highly dangerous whether the beam stayed contained or not.
Sorry to reply to my own post, but I meant to say that the previous statements apply primarily to facial capture. Full body capture is dramatically easier and pretty close to as realistic as it's going to get since you're already capturing movement close to the skeleton. Facial capture is trying to capture all the skin and muscle and fat sliding around on top of the skull, which is the primary reason it's much more complex.
As the studio manager of a motion capture studio (http://motekentertainment.com), we find that the amount of work involved in capturing and recreating human realism is terribly difficult and ultimately unrewarding since you never quite get there (yet).
When doing high-level realism, we often use mocap to get 90% there and finish up with a traditional animation pass. For most productions, we try to steer more towards a stylized product since you will get better and typically less freaky results.
I think that we just need two classes of Olympics and competition: 'pure' human with no doping or modification, and 'enhanced' with unlimited drug use and biomechanics including prosthetics.
This would let the tech side progress as far as the athletes are willing to go, and create a separate class for 'natural' people. Let's face it: we will eventually have biomechanical bones, organs and muscles which will far surpass the capabilities of our original ones.
We might as well use the "Special Olympics" as the grounds for these enhanced athletics, especially since they already include prosthetic-enhanced competitors.
I'm sure that the official meant that Childs' supervisors had recommended that he be fired, only to find out that they couldn't do it immediately for some reason (such as contracts, union rules, other red tape, etc.).
From the photo, the equipment on the hand looks like stuff from Immersion Corporation (http://www.immersion.com). You may remember Immersion as the company who won a lawsuit for the vibration technology in the Playstation controllers. GameDaily Biz has branded them as 'Patent Trolls'. However, it may not be their hardware - in which case please skip the next paragraph.
The Cyberglove is a tight glove with flexion sensors to register finger position and thumb rotation. That would also lead me to believe that the haptic device is Immersion's CyberGrasp. The Cybergrasp uses an exoskeleton-like device with rings that fit over each finger joint give resistive force feedback to simulate 'collision' with an object. You can do your own Google image search for the Cybergrasp. It's almost always used with a CyberGlove. The CyberForce is a force-feedback armature for providing resistance in 6 degrees to the position of your hand. It's produced with technology licensed from SensAble Technologies.
All of these pieces of hardware have been around for years. The same applies with many flavors of 3D displays. I fail to see what the new technology here is. VR people have been doing this for a long time.
While you do have some valid points, remember that Google is at the care an ADVERTISING company. Their prime revenue comes from the huge volume of ads embedded in individual pages, not directly through search.
There are a few major approaches being used right now. They all come down to delivering a different image for the left and right eyes. The system in TFA uses a combination of circular polarization and frame sequential techniques. Here are the major techniques currently used:
Frame sequential _This uses a single projector or screen with a high framerate, 120Hz or higher. Each frame alternates between a left and right eye view. The viewer wears a pair of LCD 'shutter glasses' which are synchronized to flicker and allow only the correct frame through per eye. Thus, a 120Hz output becomes a 60Hz image stream to the viewer. Unfortunately, the glasses are expensive and not easy to deploy to a large audience. This technique also often causes headaches after extended viewing.
Head mounted display _Funky goggles are used to provide a dedicated image for each eye in close proximity. Advantages include the ability for head tracking which provides parallax shift and real immersion. The units are also localized to the wearer, so you can have them in small spaces like cockpits. Disadvantages: relatively low resolution and expensive for large deployments.
Linear polarization _Using 2 projectors (usually DLP) which have linearly polarized filters in front of the lenses, one has left-right polarization for one image and the second an up-down polarization for the other eye. The user wears paper glasses with lens orientation corresponding the the projector output. This technique is easiest to deploy to large audiences since the paper glasses are relatively cheap. However, the 3D effect can be broken by rotating the head.
Circular polarization _Similar as the linear approach, filters are used in front of 2 projectors creating left-right images. The filters used for the projectors and glasses are circularly polarized which allows head rotation, but suffers from 'ghosting' or 'image bleed' since the circular polarization does not block all light intended for the other eye.
Chromatic filtering _Similar to the old red and blue glasses from yesteryear, this technique uses spectrum filtering to restrict certain wavelengths from reaching each eye. When used with filters in front of 2 projectors, dedicated left-right images can be created. The newer techniques use more controlled filtering so that the color aberrations are minimized.
Lenticular _Using a special vertically banded lenticular lens in front of a back-projection screen or TFT/Plasma, this technique creates 'zones' in which 3D images can be seen without any hardware required on the viewer. By shifting your head left or right, you fall into viewing 'sweet-spots'. This is based on the fact that a human's eyes are generally spaced the same distance apart. One of the great things about this approach is that since there are images from multiple camera angles being displayed simultaneously, you can actually get a little parallax before falling out of a sweet-spot. You'll see this technique more and more at trade shows and in public advertisements.
Our studio makes actual 3D content for 3D visualization systems.
Slashdot Mirror
...forgot to mention the point: in this system we've had only 3 disk failures in the past 4 years and these were all in the RAID6 DAS arrays. Everything was rebuilt without a blip. On one of our really old 6-disk servers we had a RAID controller fail and we lost some data, but fortunately the important stuff was properly backed up. Not to harp about it, but the people saying that RAID is not a backup are right on.
At our studio, we run several 24x500GB-drive RAID6 DAS arrays for top tier storage. The backup system is comprised of redundant NexentaStor heads with a ZFS RAID-Z virtualizing across 16 storage nodes through iSCSI, each node a 4x1TB 1U box in RAID5 (which makes a RAIDZ-55?). The RAIDZ55 holds unstructured data plus a VTL partition, which gets a scheduled dump to LTO4 and taken offsite.
I just wouldnt want to be in the tunnels with something like that racing around held in place by magnets,
My understanding is that the tunnel area will become radioactive once the beams are active. Getting near the beams or magnets would be highly dangerous whether the beam stayed contained or not.
Games? Nonsense - this is Apple we're talking about.
Sorry to reply to my own post, but I meant to say that the previous statements apply primarily to facial capture. Full body capture is dramatically easier and pretty close to as realistic as it's going to get since you're already capturing movement close to the skeleton. Facial capture is trying to capture all the skin and muscle and fat sliding around on top of the skull, which is the primary reason it's much more complex.
As the studio manager of a motion capture studio (http://motekentertainment.com), we find that the amount of work involved in capturing and recreating human realism is terribly difficult and ultimately unrewarding since you never quite get there (yet). When doing high-level realism, we often use mocap to get 90% there and finish up with a traditional animation pass. For most productions, we try to steer more towards a stylized product since you will get better and typically less freaky results.
Nexenta has released an OpenSolaris based storage server platform which we're using as a storage virtualization head. It rocks.
Yes, deeper like the ocean. Filled with sharks.
I think that we just need two classes of Olympics and competition: 'pure' human with no doping or modification, and 'enhanced' with unlimited drug use and biomechanics including prosthetics. This would let the tech side progress as far as the athletes are willing to go, and create a separate class for 'natural' people. Let's face it: we will eventually have biomechanical bones, organs and muscles which will far surpass the capabilities of our original ones. We might as well use the "Special Olympics" as the grounds for these enhanced athletics, especially since they already include prosthetic-enhanced competitors.
'cool'
there's an Atomic Force Microsoft
Um, microscope? Or is this the new Windows Mobile OS for nanoscale devices?
I think that Hasbro's Trivial Pursuit of Scrabulous is just an Operation in Obsession. They certainly have their panties in a Twister.
I'm sure that the official meant that Childs' supervisors had recommended that he be fired, only to find out that they couldn't do it immediately for some reason (such as contracts, union rules, other red tape, etc.).
Those who would sacrifice cargo space for a little extended range deserve neither cargo space nor range... wait, sorry.
Not when we have Jean-Claude van Damme to keep us in line [http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0111438/]
"I have not failed. I've just found 10,000 ways that won't work."
Thomas A. Edison
a txt spk vrsn of wki shd ft 8gb i tnk
is nly bcz ppl r sch grmr nubz tat tey nd 2 wst $
dud shd fltr 2 txtspk b4 he cmprss
Thr, fxd tat 4 u.
From the photo, the equipment on the hand looks like stuff from Immersion Corporation (http://www.immersion.com). You may remember Immersion as the company who won a lawsuit for the vibration technology in the Playstation controllers. GameDaily Biz has branded them as 'Patent Trolls'. However, it may not be their hardware - in which case please skip the next paragraph.
The Cyberglove is a tight glove with flexion sensors to register finger position and thumb rotation. That would also lead me to believe that the haptic device is Immersion's CyberGrasp. The Cybergrasp uses an exoskeleton-like device with rings that fit over each finger joint give resistive force feedback to simulate 'collision' with an object. You can do your own Google image search for the Cybergrasp. It's almost always used with a CyberGlove. The CyberForce is a force-feedback armature for providing resistance in 6 degrees to the position of your hand. It's produced with technology licensed from SensAble Technologies.
All of these pieces of hardware have been around for years. The same applies with many flavors of 3D displays. I fail to see what the new technology here is. VR people have been doing this for a long time.
How did they know it was pasty white guys?
While you do have some valid points, remember that Google is at the care an ADVERTISING company. Their prime revenue comes from the huge volume of ads embedded in individual pages, not directly through search.
Are you talking about Spore or Duke Nukem Forever?
Oh, and please make my shot tequila.
There are a few major approaches being used right now. They all come down to delivering a different image for the left and right eyes. The system in TFA uses a combination of circular polarization and frame sequential techniques. Here are the major techniques currently used:
Frame sequential
_This uses a single projector or screen with a high framerate, 120Hz or higher. Each frame alternates between a left and right eye view. The viewer wears a pair of LCD 'shutter glasses' which are synchronized to flicker and allow only the correct frame through per eye. Thus, a 120Hz output becomes a 60Hz image stream to the viewer. Unfortunately, the glasses are expensive and not easy to deploy to a large audience. This technique also often causes headaches after extended viewing.
Head mounted display
_Funky goggles are used to provide a dedicated image for each eye in close proximity. Advantages include the ability for head tracking which provides parallax shift and real immersion. The units are also localized to the wearer, so you can have them in small spaces like cockpits. Disadvantages: relatively low resolution and expensive for large deployments.
Linear polarization
_Using 2 projectors (usually DLP) which have linearly polarized filters in front of the lenses, one has left-right polarization for one image and the second an up-down polarization for the other eye. The user wears paper glasses with lens orientation corresponding the the projector output. This technique is easiest to deploy to large audiences since the paper glasses are relatively cheap. However, the 3D effect can be broken by rotating the head.
Circular polarization
_Similar as the linear approach, filters are used in front of 2 projectors creating left-right images. The filters used for the projectors and glasses are circularly polarized which allows head rotation, but suffers from 'ghosting' or 'image bleed' since the circular polarization does not block all light intended for the other eye.
Chromatic filtering
_Similar to the old red and blue glasses from yesteryear, this technique uses spectrum filtering to restrict certain wavelengths from reaching each eye. When used with filters in front of 2 projectors, dedicated left-right images can be created. The newer techniques use more controlled filtering so that the color aberrations are minimized.
Lenticular
_Using a special vertically banded lenticular lens in front of a back-projection screen or TFT/Plasma, this technique creates 'zones' in which 3D images can be seen without any hardware required on the viewer. By shifting your head left or right, you fall into viewing 'sweet-spots'. This is based on the fact that a human's eyes are generally spaced the same distance apart. One of the great things about this approach is that since there are images from multiple camera angles being displayed simultaneously, you can actually get a little parallax before falling out of a sweet-spot. You'll see this technique more and more at trade shows and in public advertisements.
Our studio makes actual 3D content for 3D visualization systems.
You mean a question meant less to elicit an answer and more to make an assertion?
Maybe you should spend more than an hour researching next time.
oh come on! a haiku answer to a haiku question and no one notices?