141–150 of 174 posts
Eh. To me it looks like the authors extends "lines-as-edges" explanation of why we can understand line drawings to the claim that the visual cortex works almost only on edge detection, which is obviously bunk and so easily refuted by him. Then later he shows a shillouette image we can understand even though the edges themselves are not understandable, and somehow this is supposed to be evidence against lines as edges…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it is more that as technology grows it spreads its terms and contexts to the point of entering pop culture. I'm not sure if the populous uses terms simply becuase they have heard them before in the same context or due to an understanding. I have to point out that P.G. Wodehouse is often used as an example of this style in recent "literature". I can't even figure out the words to describe the sources of his te…
This really has piqued my interest. Would you care to share an example or two, please?
I just went searching through a bunch of quote lists to try to find examples.
I grabbed some just to show the breadth of metaphors and analogs used. What I think I realized is that some of the best examples are probably descriptions of the scenes.
I'm too young to know but apparently he was pioneering. I certainly find him funny with old world elocution.
I hope you feel satisfied.
His most famous character is Jeeves the personal gentlemen's gentlemen of Bertie Wooster. Askjeeves.com was named for Jeeves. They are set in the post Great War England/The continent and Bertie is young and part of the leisure class.
Bertie is over educated and deep into night life, pop culture, and sporting. The settings are always over-privileged people trying to work out there issues while Jeeves is the observer and advisor.
this I thought was good because the use of props, underpinnings, bird, orphanage, payoff.
Bertie Wooster: I was standing on Eden-Roc in Antibes last month, and a girl I know slightly pointed to this fellow diving into the water and asked me if I didn't think that his legs were about the silliest-looking pair of props ever issued to a human being. Well, I agreed that indeed they were and, for perhaps a couple of minutes, I was extraordinarily witty and satirical about this bird's underpinnings. And guess what happened next. Jeeves: I am agog to learn, sir. Bertie Wooster: A cyclone is what happened next, Jeeves, emanating from this girl. She started on my own legs, saying that they weren't much to write home about, and then she moved on to dissect my manners, morals, intellect, general physique and method of eating asparagus. By the time she'd finished, the best that could be said about poor old Bertram was that, so far as was known, he hadn't actually burnt down an orphanage. Jeeves: A most illuminating story, sir. Bertie Wooster: No, no, no, no, no, Jeeves, Jeeves, you haven't had the payoff yet! Jeeves: Oh, I'm so sorry, sir! The structure of your tale deceived me, for a moment, into thinking that it was over. Bertie Wooster: No, no, no, the point is that she was actually engaged to this fellow with the legs. They'd had some minor disagreement the night before, but there they were the following night, dining together, their differences made up and the love light once more in their eyes. And I expect much the same results with my cousin Angela. Jeeves: I look forward to it with lively anticipation, sir.
Jeeves: I hope you won't take it amiss, sir, but I've been giving some attention to what might be called the "amatory entanglements" at Brinkley. It seems to me that drastic measures may be called for. Bertie Wooster: [sighs audibly] Drastic away, Jeeves. The prospect of being united for life with a woman who talks about "little baby bunnies" fills me with an unnamed dread.
gaming the use of chip-in
Bertie Wooster: Oh, very well, then. If you're not going to chip in and save a fellow creature, I suppose I can't make you. You're going to look pretty silly, though, when I get old Biffy out of the soup without your assistance.
this has a few but is a good example of using the reaction of a character in movie to describe ones self.
“I felt most awfully braced. I felt as if the clouds had rolled away and all was as it used to be. I felt like one of those chappies in the novels who calls off the fight with his wife in the last chapter and decides to forget and forgive. I felt I wanted to do all sorts of other things to show Jeeves that I appreciated him.” ― P.G. Wodehouse, My Man Jeeves
this is good becuase he uses Shakespeare
Bertie Wooster: Well, let me tell you, Mr. Mangelhoffer, that the man that hath no music in himself is fit for... hang on a minute. [goes into the other room, where Jeeves is peeling potatoes] Jeeves, what was it Shakespeare said the man that hadn't music in himself was fit for? Jeeves: Treasons, stratagems, and spoils, sir. Bertie Wooster: [returning] Treasons, stratagems, and spoils. Mr. Mangelhoffer: What? Bertie Wooster: That's what he's fit for, the man that hath no music in himself.
Aunt Dahlia: Oh, Bertie, if magazines had ears, Milady's Boudoir would be up to them in debt. I've got nasty little men in bowler hats knocking at my door.
Very frustrating article to read. The article is setting up a straw man and attacking it. He is acting like everyone else thinks: 1) edges are the only important features in images and 2) line drawings can only represent edges. Who are these brainless absolutists that he is attacking? Then he's acting like he is the only one with other bright ideas that nobody will listen to. I think it is obvious to anyone who think…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oh, I don’t know. I mean conceptually a simulation is just a model that changes over some axis, time being a prime candidate. I’ve seen some goofy models that use an axis other than time to create some interesting visuals. There are definitely game makers playing with some of this stuff. Calculation may be the wrong word for what’s necessary for a simulation, but I don’t think you can have a simulation without someth…
What I wonder about from your explanation is how does a simulation know where the noise is coming from. I feeling is that inside the simulation one is unable to differentiate the source of the noise.
I think about this a lot, and sometimes wonder if the edges of science can't be solved until some meta being comes along and implements that edge case. And then the edge cases get weirder and weirder. But really, I'm relying on my intuition of superlinearity when I think about this stuff, and I can see certain problems with simulations going to infinity faster than, say, the infinity of the infinite time argument that we must be in a simulation.
Ten years or so ago I was working on a video chip that had an upscaler feature. While prototyping and simulating it, we first started by applying a mathematically-correct (i.e. information preserving) FIR filter to do the upscale. Then we compared the result with other solutions and found that ours looked worse. We asked our colleagues to blind-test it and they all picked third-party-scaled images over ours. At first…
The author mentions this twice:
> This hypothesis is compatible with Lines-As-Edges, while answering many of these questions.
Eh. To me it looks like the authors extends "lines-as-edges" explanation of why we can understand line drawings to the claim that the visual cortex works almost only on edge detection, which is obviously bunk and so easily refuted by him. Then later he shows a shillouette image we can understand even though the edges themselves are not understandable, and somehow this is supposed to be evidence against lines as edges…
The word is spelled "silhouette".
Ten years or so ago I was working on a video chip that had an upscaler feature. While prototyping and simulating it, we first started by applying a mathematically-correct (i.e. information preserving) FIR filter to do the upscale. Then we compared the result with other solutions and found that ours looked worse. We asked our colleagues to blind-test it and they all picked third-party-scaled images over ours. At first…
Sounds like using the wrong metric, the upscaled image should be compared against the original full resolution one, not the downscaled one. Obviously you can't know what the full resolution one looks like when actually upscaling (vs testing), but you can make an educated guess.
Ten years or so ago I was working on a video chip that had an upscaler feature. While prototyping and simulating it, we first started by applying a mathematically-correct (i.e. information preserving) FIR filter to do the upscale. Then we compared the result with other solutions and found that ours looked worse. We asked our colleagues to blind-test it and they all picked third-party-scaled images over ours. At first…
I would put it like this: Sharpening increases the high frequencies to cover the loss of even higher ones lost in downscaling.
Ten years or so ago I was working on a video chip that had an upscaler feature. While prototyping and simulating it, we first started by applying a mathematically-correct (i.e. information preserving) FIR filter to do the upscale. Then we compared the result with other solutions and found that ours looked worse. We asked our colleagues to blind-test it and they all picked third-party-scaled images over ours. At first…
Another way of looking it, more along the lines that you're talking about, is that it depends on your error model. The traditional way of measuring error is RMS pointwise in pixels. Doing some sort of interpolation on pixels gives a pretty good result for that. However, another way to look at it is that it may be better to have a positional error, i.e. a particular color or intensity level is in the wrong spot, than to have an intensity/color error, i.e. you have a pixel that has an intensity/color that's not present in the source signal.
This same basic issue was the basis of a big divide in font rendering for many years, where the Mac would render fonts with the exact geometry of the letters, but then anti-aliased, while Windows would use font hinting to make the shape snap to the pixel grid. Personally I thought that the Windows approach was a lot easier to read on a screen, but the Mac approach had the advantage that the geometry of the text would be exactly the same in print as it was on the screen, back when print was something that was important, especially for Mac users.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A manager once told me he'd never hire a PhD because once they complete the specialized work we hire them for, they inevitably get put on something outside their specialty - like your linked xkcd - and then their acceptance as experts along with that behavior causes real problems. Another time I had an older PhD moved to my area (outside his) where we were trying to meet a number of objectives. He said in a meeting t…
I once worked with a PhD who claimed that basically any novel bit of coding was a "research problem", and thus not worth bothering. Using a hashtable to speed up an algorithm? Research problem. Using raw TCP instead of HTTP for a long running connection? Research problem. Implementing a graph algorithm you could read up on Wikipedia? Research problem. I think it was only when I solved three of those "research problem…