Speaking of which, why don't probes ever have true color cameras? What's with all the false color images from probes?
They often do have red/green/blue filters so that we can make true colour pictures out of them, but the thing is, true colour isn't very pertinent from a scientifical point of vue, the point of true colour is more to know what one would see there. It's more interesting to have filters that filter light at key wavelengths matching to absorption or emission of method or hydrogen, whatever makes the atmosphere or surface composition of these bodies.
For example, in the case of Titan, true colour is useless, all you see is a big orange fuzzy ball. As if you use Cassini probe's CB3 filter, a near infrared (938 nm) filter, you can see the ground through the thick atmosphere, which is obviously much more interesting, and using other filters that reveal aerosols or methane, you can learn more about the atmosphere.
So that's why we have so few true colour images coming from space probes, they present much less scientifical interest than certain infrared or ultraviolet images, because if you look at the spectrum of light, the visible spectrum is fairly narrow compared to the ultraviolet and infrared spectrum, and that's why more interesting things are found over there.
While I understand how they came to this conclusion, I doubt people will start to say "newly wedded" anytime soon. Why? Cause "newly wed" is an expression, and also because Newlyweds is an awesome reality TV show. I can't imagine people 50 or 100 years from now ignoring that fact.
Thats fine and dandy, but at what point did government stop playing by the rules?
Sorry about pointing you to the Bush administration, but given my young age I know about it better than any previous administration. Only to tell you, look at all the stuff they have done. How much of it is arguably unconstitutional? A lot.
If the constitution is irrelevant, then why don't we simply ignore it all together.
Once again, tell the Bush administration, or rather don't, they're already vastly ignoring it.
Jefferson was right in the respect that we should have re-written the constitution from scratch every 20 years or so.
Oh yeah, brilliant idea, I'd love to see Ronald Reagan or George W. Bush rewrite the constitution from scratch. "Oh wait, where did the Habeas Corpus go? And who merged the executive and the legislative branches together?"
Similarly with this stop button. Instead of a driver speeding away from the police, potentially killing himself or a family in the opposite lane, the chase can come to a quick and safe (for everyone) halt.
Funny thing, I misunderstood the first part of this sentence the first time I read it into something to the effect of "such a system could potentially kill the driver or a family (although not in the opposite lane)" because, here's what I figured:
Suppose you're a thief on the run in a stolen car, doing a 90 mph on the leftmost lane on the freeway. Then the police remotely shuts down your engine, only allowing you to steer and brake. By the time you realized that you can't do anything about it, no matter what you try, you decide to pull to the side of the road. Only problem is, you're now doing a 40 mph, and cars on the left lane are doing a 70 mph. So you have two choices, stop your car on the left lane, which might result in a chain accident, or risk crossing the lane(s) to the right to stop on the side of the road, while risking again a chain accident.
All of this just so some rich dude with a good insurance can get his stolen car back, and not even arrest the thief? (with such a system, as a thief you'll quickly run away/steal another car and run away as soon as the stolen car would be stopped by the police, thus rendering your apprehension difficult)
A gaussian blur is indeed a good choice, as it's pretty efficient at completely "destroying" the higher frequency components (finer details) you want to definitely lose, although filtering with a windowed sinc (aka Lanczos filter) is even more efficient at doing that.
That is to say, straight "mozaicing" with no prior filtering lets you opportunities to reconstruct the original image using superresolution techniques (only in the case you show more than once picture of the mozaiced subject, such as in a video)
Oh come now. Although I don't want this to turn into a political flamewar, France doesn't have any sort of pervasive hatred toward Americans.
Shhh, don't ruin it for them, for some reason they seem to enjoy the thought that the rest of entire planet hates and despises them. No idea where they've got this idea from that the whole world hates them, probably FOX News and the likes I guess..
EU is the land of unlocked phones and you're trying to tell us THEY'RE the ones with a lack of choice?
No. They don't lack choice so far, but as my comment was a reply to a comment which said "no iPhone for them = a good thing for them", my point was that it's not a good thing for them to have one less phone, although locked, to choose from.
are you seriously suggesting that a locked phone == more choice?
....
Yes of course, do you even think before you type? Obviously, one more phone to choose from (although locked) == more choice than no new phone to choose from at all. Do you even know what "choice" means?
This is excellent, it means those EU countries which won't accept iPhone will have to churn out something thats a whole lot better, this is good news for consumers!
Oh yeah, a good thing consumers there have less choice, they never buy what's best for them, unlike us who know better, it's a good thing their choice is being restricted to what we deem better for their clueless self.
You've got a good point, but here's why it's relevant to claim China is beating us to go back there : we can't go back there.
Sure, back in 1970, we could go to the moon whenever we wanted. But ever since the end of the Saturn V rocket, we haven't had a launcher powerful enough to send men back there. In about 35 years. That's why we can say they're beating us back, they'll be able to go there before we are, because then they'll be able to send a man there, and we won't, even if we wanted to really hard.
As long as people want more polygons, more texture detail, and higher resolutions, realtime raytracing will never be a production reality.
While I think you've got a point, I think it's wrong to assume that it'll indefinitely push back the coming of real-time raytracing in games. The more polygons, detailed textures, and higher resolutions we get, the less we want more of them, which will eventually soon enough lead to a greater demand for raytracing or whatever we'll find shiny then.
Simply means games will appear more eye-candy than they currently are. Gameplay will not change.
When I read this I was afraid you were going for yet another of these "better graphics = stagnant gameplay" post. As you pointed out, it's not all about graphics vs. gameplay anyways, there are other things that make a game great, like physics and animation.
I wish the "omg graphics improvements are freezing gameplay improvement" trolls would realize that there's more to game than graphics + gameplay.
My point was that these figures weren't necessarily relevant, so obviously if you act like they're so relevant.. Plus, why do we even care in the first place, these are nothing but mere web browsers, not a way of life or political parties or whatever.
Slashdot Mirror
Also, half of the articles praise should be directed to the engine, not the game.
Isn't Wolf:ET's engine the Quake 3 engine?
No, Counter Strike
Your just jealous I beat you to it.
Who wouldn't be..
Better than counterstrike?
Errr, if it's free then where can I download it?
What a lame story about nothing.
Ditto. I'm disappointed to see CowboyNeal letting that by..
I for one welcome our new sexual-robotic overlords.
Meh. You trully are inspired. Where do you find all of that!
On a side note, one should create an account dedicated to the making of systematic overlord jokes.
It's simply a trivial way to keep data miners from getting useful data.
That sounds fine and dandy, but what's the use of ruining it for data miners?
Just to spit in the soup of various data miners.
Wow, way to stick it to the man, dude!
Speaking of which, why don't probes ever have true color cameras? What's with all the false color images from probes?
They often do have red/green/blue filters so that we can make true colour pictures out of them, but the thing is, true colour isn't very pertinent from a scientifical point of vue, the point of true colour is more to know what one would see there. It's more interesting to have filters that filter light at key wavelengths matching to absorption or emission of method or hydrogen, whatever makes the atmosphere or surface composition of these bodies.
For example, in the case of Titan, true colour is useless, all you see is a big orange fuzzy ball. As if you use Cassini probe's CB3 filter, a near infrared (938 nm) filter, you can see the ground through the thick atmosphere, which is obviously much more interesting, and using other filters that reveal aerosols or methane, you can learn more about the atmosphere.
So that's why we have so few true colour images coming from space probes, they present much less scientifical interest than certain infrared or ultraviolet images, because if you look at the spectrum of light, the visible spectrum is fairly narrow compared to the ultraviolet and infrared spectrum, and that's why more interesting things are found over there.
Now may be your last chance to be a 'newly wed'
While I understand how they came to this conclusion, I doubt people will start to say "newly wedded" anytime soon. Why? Cause "newly wed" is an expression, and also because Newlyweds is an awesome reality TV show. I can't imagine people 50 or 100 years from now ignoring that fact.
Thats fine and dandy, but at what point did government stop playing by the rules?
Sorry about pointing you to the Bush administration, but given my young age I know about it better than any previous administration. Only to tell you, look at all the stuff they have done. How much of it is arguably unconstitutional? A lot.
If the constitution is irrelevant, then why don't we simply ignore it all together.
Once again, tell the Bush administration, or rather don't, they're already vastly ignoring it.
Jefferson was right in the respect that we should have re-written the constitution from scratch every 20 years or so.
Oh yeah, brilliant idea, I'd love to see Ronald Reagan or George W. Bush rewrite the constitution from scratch. "Oh wait, where did the Habeas Corpus go? And who merged the executive and the legislative branches together?"
Similarly with this stop button. Instead of a driver speeding away from the police, potentially killing himself or a family in the opposite lane, the chase can come to a quick and safe (for everyone) halt.
Funny thing, I misunderstood the first part of this sentence the first time I read it into something to the effect of "such a system could potentially kill the driver or a family (although not in the opposite lane)" because, here's what I figured :
Suppose you're a thief on the run in a stolen car, doing a 90 mph on the leftmost lane on the freeway. Then the police remotely shuts down your engine, only allowing you to steer and brake. By the time you realized that you can't do anything about it, no matter what you try, you decide to pull to the side of the road. Only problem is, you're now doing a 40 mph, and cars on the left lane are doing a 70 mph. So you have two choices, stop your car on the left lane, which might result in a chain accident, or risk crossing the lane(s) to the right to stop on the side of the road, while risking again a chain accident.
All of this just so some rich dude with a good insurance can get his stolen car back, and not even arrest the thief? (with such a system, as a thief you'll quickly run away/steal another car and run away as soon as the stolen car would be stopped by the police, thus rendering your apprehension difficult)
Better yet porn.asia
Seriously, this one is gonna be worth millions..
A gaussian blur is indeed a good choice, as it's pretty efficient at completely "destroying" the higher frequency components (finer details) you want to definitely lose, although filtering with a windowed sinc (aka Lanczos filter) is even more efficient at doing that.
That is to say, straight "mozaicing" with no prior filtering lets you opportunities to reconstruct the original image using superresolution techniques (only in the case you show more than once picture of the mozaiced subject, such as in a video)
Oh come now. Although I don't want this to turn into a political flamewar, France doesn't have any sort of pervasive hatred toward Americans.
Shhh, don't ruin it for them, for some reason they seem to enjoy the thought that the rest of entire planet hates and despises them. No idea where they've got this idea from that the whole world hates them, probably FOX News and the likes I guess..
EU is the land of unlocked phones and you're trying to tell us THEY'RE the ones with a lack of choice?
No. They don't lack choice so far, but as my comment was a reply to a comment which said "no iPhone for them = a good thing for them", my point was that it's not a good thing for them to have one less phone, although locked, to choose from.
are you seriously suggesting that a locked phone == more choice?
....
Yes of course, do you even think before you type? Obviously, one more phone to choose from (although locked) == more choice than no new phone to choose from at all. Do you even know what "choice" means?
This is excellent, it means those EU countries which won't accept iPhone will have to churn out something thats a whole lot better, this is good news for consumers!
Oh yeah, a good thing consumers there have less choice, they never buy what's best for them, unlike us who know better, it's a good thing their choice is being restricted to what we deem better for their clueless self.
That joke is as bulgarian as it is french, in other words, we have it here too.
Such resolution, sure, but they can't take a 10x10 km area at such a resolution in one shot.
I first read the title as "Germans Taken Into Space May Come Back Deadlier". As a frenchman, I was scared.
You've got a good point, but here's why it's relevant to claim China is beating us to go back there : we can't go back there.
Sure, back in 1970, we could go to the moon whenever we wanted. But ever since the end of the Saturn V rocket, we haven't had a launcher powerful enough to send men back there. In about 35 years. That's why we can say they're beating us back, they'll be able to go there before we are, because then they'll be able to send a man there, and we won't, even if we wanted to really hard.
4GB sounds like a large MTU
As long as people want more polygons, more texture detail, and higher resolutions, realtime raytracing will never be a production reality.
While I think you've got a point, I think it's wrong to assume that it'll indefinitely push back the coming of real-time raytracing in games. The more polygons, detailed textures, and higher resolutions we get, the less we want more of them, which will eventually soon enough lead to a greater demand for raytracing or whatever we'll find shiny then.
Simply means games will appear more eye-candy than they currently are. Gameplay will not change.
When I read this I was afraid you were going for yet another of these "better graphics = stagnant gameplay" post. As you pointed out, it's not all about graphics vs. gameplay anyways, there are other things that make a game great, like physics and animation.
I wish the "omg graphics improvements are freezing gameplay improvement" trolls would realize that there's more to game than graphics + gameplay.
My point was that these figures weren't necessarily relevant, so obviously if you act like they're so relevant.. Plus, why do we even care in the first place, these are nothing but mere web browsers, not a way of life or political parties or whatever.
Us geeks and our 'important' issues...