Hollywood has plenty of new, undiscovered, actors. This only allows for the studio executives to cash in on famous titles,
You are thinking about a business where celebrity is the driving force of a film and as such a single actor is able to command a huge fee.
Why would a film company rely on a single actor to create a character if they didn't have to, especially in a world where the sequel is so important. I'm sure you are right, to start with this will be used to create new films based on old franchises but I see a future where the character is entirely computer generated.
Once you remove the actor from being right in front of the camera/audience the film company can create a character and never have to worry about the actor dropping dead during filming, or demanding huge fees because if he did you just drop the next body actor in front of the camera and let the computer carry on making the movie.
In fact I can only see 1 reason to have celebrity actors, real life promotion of a film. It's hard to have a CGI character walk up the red carpet of the Oscars (although not impossible of course). I'm not sure we as an audience would accept actorless characters. Think about how big the gossip mags are which all add to the feedback loop of publicity.
there's bar code tattoo on his inner arm that -- if you lift the image and scan it -- reads "HUMAN 00001" which is kind of disconcerting.
Disconcerting indeed since they apperently don't see the need for more than 99,999 humans worldwide. Presumably they want to keep a few of us alive to do the jobs which no self-respecting robot would ever want to do.
leads only to the conclusion that on this densely populated planet there must be several women who, with time, you could end up thinking are "the one" for you.
To me that proves that there is no such thing as "the one", but that people settle for the best they think they are going to find. In particular as women start hearing that biological clock ticking louder.
I'm in my early thirties and I've noticed alot my friends starting to pair off into longer-term relationships and marriage and I never think 'thats nice, they've met their soul mate' but rather 'right place right time'.
.A similar stance is being taken in the UK, and I suspect all other 1st World Countries. Net access, via broadband, is considered as fundamental to the way current governments want Government services will be accessed in the future.
It's one of the things that makes me laugh about Peter Mandelson and his version of the 3-strikes policy.
You have one side of the government trying to build the widest possible demographic access to the internet to enable that future, while the sleazy business man tries to make it as easy as possible to remove that access at the request of big business.
You want a new map in you FPS, you buy it and download it. At least thats how it started, as add-on content smaller than an expansion pack would be.
These days it can be really small trivial stuff, like a new hair style for your characters, or a better weapon. Personaly I have no problem with it when dealing with non-competitive add-ons such as image tweaks. I have a much bigger problem with it for items which offer a competitive advantage over other players - especially in player vs player games such as FPS.
1. $5000 is not that much incentive. (Hell it wouldn't cover costs for a serious attempt. Many private investigators and bounty hunters wouldn't touch it). This would be much more valid a prize that would change someone's life - say $20 million.
the trouble with $20M prize money is it would change someone's life. Which means they would be willing to go to the extreme to find the runner, in what at the end of the day is nothing more than a slightly interesting social experiement.
Personally I think that it's the retooling which is appealing; changing the field of IT you are working in doesn't really give you new skills just a new domain to apply those existing skills to.
I doubt it would be cheaper to make, but a mirror reflects light from one direction and if you have concave shape focuses that light at a certain point, but for that to work the light has to be entering from the right direction relative to the focus point (normal straight in the front but doesn't necessarily have to be
This system would work regardless of which direction the light enters from, which means it works under very difuse light source. It also means you don't need a tracking system to keep the mirror at the right angle relative to the sun which would make installation and maintenance costs lower than a tracking mirror system.
Holodecks would require a lot of space. Land would still cost a lot of money. So, you might need communal holodecks for people who can't afford large parcels of land.
Actually I would see the opposite being true. Why have a big house when a small room the size of a walk-in closet and the illusion of as much space as you could ever need could fulfil the same purpose from a phsycological point of view. Especially if you don't need to have a lot of stuff to store locally (have a wardrobe that was actually a transporter to a storage warehouse on the moon)
Reliable holodecks could allow for massive population densities in cities.
The Scottish Parliament recently announced it wouldn't fund it's share of the High Speed rail route, pretty much because they are looking to save money like everyone else.
Oh I agree, the classics are classics because they've been filtered by decades of viewings and only the cream of the crop make it to the viewers today.
Where as what is being made today is just chucked into public and left to sink or swim on it's own merits without the benefit of that filtering.
Provided viewers can accept it, as it becomes more common, it will become less expensive, and eventually fairly ubiquitous, such that the next generation may regard 2D as we often regard black & white.
You mean with an emphasis on the characters and story rather than the effects thus producing better although dated looking films?
But if you have a cloud based processing, you could use your phone to record some video (uploaded in realtime so the only limitation is battery life and bandwidth costs), use a GUI interface running locally on the phone to choose how that video needs to be editted (clipping/joining/lighting effects etc) and let the cloud take care of the rendering.
You see cloud computing taking over a role which you have got fulfilled by an expensive (relatively speaking) PC/Laptop which works for you because you already have all the stuff you need to do that work. I see it providing as needed processing power to small/cheap/ultramobile devices running on batteries and with a wireless network connection of some sort.
That proves only that either successful, and hence likely to be intelligent people, have more choice in whether to have child or In the past when predators where still a real risk, intelligence allowed for greater success in raising children to adulthood and hence need less children to be reproductively successful.
It doesn't prove that the selectors used by men and women which made physical looks in women and resource provision and defense in men importanty a few hundred -> thousand years ago aren't still being used today even if they selectors are less relavent now.
Slashdot Mirror
You are thinking about a business where celebrity is the driving force of a film and as such a single actor is able to command a huge fee.
Why would a film company rely on a single actor to create a character if they didn't have to, especially in a world where the sequel is so important. I'm sure you are right, to start with this will be used to create new films based on old franchises but I see a future where the character is entirely computer generated.
Once you remove the actor from being right in front of the camera/audience the film company can create a character and never have to worry about the actor dropping dead during filming, or demanding huge fees because if he did you just drop the next body actor in front of the camera and let the computer carry on making the movie.
In fact I can only see 1 reason to have celebrity actors, real life promotion of a film. It's hard to have a CGI character walk up the red carpet of the Oscars (although not impossible of course). I'm not sure we as an audience would accept actorless characters. Think about how big the gossip mags are which all add to the feedback loop of publicity.
Disconcerting indeed since they apperently don't see the need for more than 99,999 humans worldwide. Presumably they want to keep a few of us alive to do the jobs which no self-respecting robot would ever want to do.
To me that proves that there is no such thing as "the one", but that people settle for the best they think they are going to find. In particular as women start hearing that biological clock ticking louder.
I'm in my early thirties and I've noticed alot my friends starting to pair off into longer-term relationships and marriage and I never think 'thats nice, they've met their soul mate' but rather 'right place right time'.
.A similar stance is being taken in the UK, and I suspect all other 1st World Countries. Net access, via broadband, is considered as fundamental to the way current governments want Government services will be accessed in the future.
It's one of the things that makes me laugh about Peter Mandelson and his version of the 3-strikes policy.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2009/oct/28/mandelson-date-blocking-filesharers-connections
You have one side of the government trying to build the widest possible demographic access to the internet to enable that future, while the sleazy business man tries to make it as easy as possible to remove that access at the request of big business.
Downloadable Content
You want a new map in you FPS, you buy it and download it. At least thats how it started, as add-on content smaller than an expansion pack would be.
These days it can be really small trivial stuff, like a new hair style for your characters, or a better weapon. Personaly I have no problem with it when dealing with non-competitive add-ons such as image tweaks. I have a much bigger problem with it for items which offer a competitive advantage over other players - especially in player vs player games such as FPS.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Downloadable_content
the trouble with $20M prize money is it would change someone's life. Which means they would be willing to go to the extreme to find the runner, in what at the end of the day is nothing more than a slightly interesting social experiement.
Why not just take a cruise ship? More efficent (in terms of cargo capacity) and only a bit slower than a airship would be.
assuming is bad science, we need to test this scientifically
I'm waiting for the mandatory "Cauliflower with a frikin laser on it's head"
OK, cauliflower isn't a fruit but I couldn't think of a fruit that has a head
Personally I think that it's the retooling which is appealing; changing the field of IT you are working in doesn't really give you new skills just a new domain to apply those existing skills to.
I doubt it would be cheaper to make, but a mirror reflects light from one direction and if you have concave shape focuses that light at a certain point, but for that to work the light has to be entering from the right direction relative to the focus point (normal straight in the front but doesn't necessarily have to be
This system would work regardless of which direction the light enters from, which means it works under very difuse light source. It also means you don't need a tracking system to keep the mirror at the right angle relative to the sun which would make installation and maintenance costs lower than a tracking mirror system.
Actually I would see the opposite being true. Why have a big house when a small room the size of a walk-in closet and the illusion of as much space as you could ever need could fulfil the same purpose from a phsycological point of view. Especially if you don't need to have a lot of stuff to store locally (have a wardrobe that was actually a transporter to a storage warehouse on the moon)
Reliable holodecks could allow for massive population densities in cities.
makeup is an effect which can be reproduced in real life with some basic equipment and skill.
Photos are edited like precisely because the effects are not possible in real life (outside of a tiny number of models perhaps).
snow is actually a really good insulator
The Scottish Parliament recently announced it wouldn't fund it's share of the High Speed rail route, pretty much because they are looking to save money like everyone else.
it just makes aiming rather difficult unless
If we are talking realatively low tech, how about a laser pointer and a basic light following nose cone.
Thats actually quite good, I hadn't realised the similarities until you pointed it out.
I thought plug-ins/add-ons ran as part of the host browsers CPU process, and thus if IE is sandboxed wouldn't Chrome also be sandboxed?
a) do people need to know the rate of accelleration of a falling object?
b) 9.8 m/s/s
Oh I agree, the classics are classics because they've been filtered by decades of viewings and only the cream of the crop make it to the viewers today.
Where as what is being made today is just chucked into public and left to sink or swim on it's own merits without the benefit of that filtering.
come on mods, that was funny
You mean with an emphasis on the characters and story rather than the effects thus producing better although dated looking films?
4.8 Hours a day, every day, week in/week out, for years ? I feel so inadequate
But if you have a cloud based processing, you could use your phone to record some video (uploaded in realtime so the only limitation is battery life and bandwidth costs), use a GUI interface running locally on the phone to choose how that video needs to be editted (clipping/joining/lighting effects etc) and let the cloud take care of the rendering.
You see cloud computing taking over a role which you have got fulfilled by an expensive (relatively speaking) PC/Laptop which works for you because you already have all the stuff you need to do that work. I see it providing as needed processing power to small/cheap/ultramobile devices running on batteries and with a wireless network connection of some sort.
That proves only that either successful, and hence likely to be intelligent people, have more choice in whether to have child or In the past when predators where still a real risk, intelligence allowed for greater success in raising children to adulthood and hence need less children to be reproductively successful.
It doesn't prove that the selectors used by men and women which made physical looks in women and resource provision and defense in men importanty a few hundred -> thousand years ago aren't still being used today even if they selectors are less relavent now.