Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Nvidia Research Turns 2D Photos into 3D Scenes

blogs.nvidia.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–239 of 239 posts

Re: Nvidia Research Turns 2D Photos into 3D Scenes

#231

Post by the_af »

willcipriano wrote: post #69
the_af wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed it's subjective. That said, what would you do with your quadrillion year long lifespan, assuming you're healthy during it? It's way past everything you can do and learn, and cosmic level events are not what the human mind can perceive as they slowly unfold... I would like to live a couple thousand years though, as long as my loved ones get to be along for the ride. Though I wonder if my loved ones would eventu…

> It's way past everything you can do and learn Such arrogance, humanity isn't all that far beyond it's banging rocks together phase. We haven't even scratched the surface. There is so much more to learn.

It's not arrogance. There aren't an infinite number of things to do and learn. It may seem so when your lifespan is less than a century, but quadrillion years? You'd run out of things that make sense for a human being.

Re: Nvidia Research Turns 2D Photos into 3D Scenes

#232

Post by the_af »

lowdest wrote: post #67
the_af wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed it's subjective. That said, what would you do with your quadrillion year long lifespan, assuming you're healthy during it? It's way past everything you can do and learn, and cosmic level events are not what the human mind can perceive as they slowly unfold... I would like to live a couple thousand years though, as long as my loved ones get to be along for the ride. Though I wonder if my loved ones would eventu…

I'm fond of my loved ones, but I also like creating new ones. I also would like to see very long term plans come to fruition. It seems very much like a "640K ought to be enough for anybody" problem. Works of art that require thousands of lifetimes to complete. Deep understanding of the physical world. Exploring the universe. Much more.

I get what you mean, but I don't think the human mind can contemplate things that take thousands of years to unfold; it's just not wired for that. Even things that take years are difficult for us to comprehend.

Re: creating new beings. How long till you also get bored of that? Remember we're talking about quadrillions of years.

An additional thing to consider: if you could live quadrillions of years and still be able to perceive things that take thousands or millions of years to unfold, wouldn't you subjectively be living the lifespan of a normal human being? That is, your life wouldn't feel long to your mind, but normal (your mind would have to adjust to run more slowly). Wouldn't then regret your "short" lifespan and wish you could live longer?

Re: Nvidia Research Turns 2D Photos into 3D Scenes

#233

Post by the_af »

p1esk wrote: post #64
the_af wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed it's subjective. That said, what would you do with your quadrillion year long lifespan, assuming you're healthy during it? It's way past everything you can do and learn, and cosmic level events are not what the human mind can perceive as they slowly unfold... I would like to live a couple thousand years though, as long as my loved ones get to be along for the ride. Though I wonder if my loved ones would eventu…

It seems like you assume you would remain human for a quadrillion years. Why? I'd assume a technology to upload yourself into a better substrate (one you have full control over) will appear within next few hundred years. From that point there are no limits on what you can do or become.

Your answer is the only valid counterpoint, in my opinion. Since the human mind cannot perceive the passage of quadrillion years, we would have to become something else, something inhuman.

I don't know whether this is something I would wish for myself. Maybe. I like being human. But maybe, who knows?

Re: Nvidia Research Turns 2D Photos into 3D Scenes

#234

Post by wokwokwok »

yorwba wrote: post #224
wokwokwok wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Any image transformation you can do on voxels you can straightforwardly transfer to nerfs No. > it might be cheaper to do it on the fly instead of redoing the training procedure to bake the change into the model. I think it’s a bit more complex than you imagine; it’s not “cheaper/not cheaper”; it’s literally the only way of doing it. If you have a transformation f(x) that takes a pixel array as in input and returns…

> Consider taking a layered svg and applying a box blur. > Now you want an svg again. > It’s not a trivial problem. Lines blur and merge, you have reconstruct an entirely new svg. Nerfs are not svgs. Consider taking a nerf and applying a box blur. Easy, a box blur on voxel data takes multiple samples within a box and averages them together, so to do the same thing to a nerf just take multiple samples and average them…

You still have to process every voxel.

> Doing all your transformations on the fly is a lovely idea, but you gotta understand reason nerf exists is that the raw voxel data is too big to store in memory.

> It’s simply not possible you can dynamically run a image processing pipeline over that volume data in real-time.

Re: Nvidia Research Turns 2D Photos into 3D Scenes

#235

Post by p1esk »

the_af wrote: post #233
p1esk wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems like you assume you would remain human for a quadrillion years. Why? I'd assume a technology to upload yourself into a better substrate (one you have full control over) will appear within next few hundred years. From that point there are no limits on what you can do or become.

Your answer is the only valid counterpoint, in my opinion. Since the human mind cannot perceive the passage of quadrillion years, we would have to become something else, something inhuman. I don't know whether this is something I would wish for myself. Maybe. I like being human. But maybe, who knows?

What do you like about being human?

Re: Nvidia Research Turns 2D Photos into 3D Scenes

#236

Post by xsmasher »

archivisti wrote: post #122
baron816 wrote: post #31

It would be really great to recreate loved ones after they have past in some sort of digital space. As I’ve gotten older, and my parents get older as well, I’ve been thinking more about what my life will be like in old age (and beyond too). I’ve also been thinking what I would want “heaven” to be. Eternal life doesn’t appeal to me much. Imagine living a quadrillion years. Even as a god, that would be miserable. That…

You mean Westworld ?

More like "Things to do in Denver when you're dead."

Re: Nvidia Research Turns 2D Photos into 3D Scenes

#237

Post by xsmasher »

wubbert wrote: post #83

IIRC Microsoft had something like this years ago, but the results weren't nearly as smooth or natural looking. I can't remember what it was called, though.

I remember a very old video where they rendered 3d scenes for frames 1 and 5 (examples) but interpolated the frames in between, or something like that, instead of re-rendering the whole scene. Maybe they were only redrawing some triangles if the angle changed too much.

If it's that tech, I'm pretty sure it got dropped when 3D acceleration made it feasible to just re-render the whole scene every frame. Dedicated hardware won out over software tricks.

Re: Nvidia Research Turns 2D Photos into 3D Scenes

#239

Post by ineedasername »

nimbleal wrote: post #151
ineedasername wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"mourn and move on" is a somewhat Western concept of dealing with death. Plenty of cultures around the world have developed different practices, up to religious forms of ancestor worship.

These practices would typically be associated with the idea that the dead have a genuine existence beyond simply “existing in my memory of them” and would be restricted in the forms they take by surrounding ritual, so I’m not sure there’s a direct point of comparison, though?

Yes, there's a direct comparison. Practices change as times and technology change. When photography became cheap enough, practices like in-home shrines often changed to incorporate photographs of loved ones. I think it's reasonable to speculate that newer forms digital representation can become part of these practices as well.
Post reply on HN