Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:Please use 'bokeh' in a more useful way (Score 1) 50

I'm not too worried about that. Not least because an important part of the "portrait" aesthetic that they're going for, here, is the more flattering portrait perspective. Which is achieved by shooting from a decent working distance. The focal length on phone-cams is far too short to even come close to filling the frame with a well composed portrait that doesn't over-emphasize noses and whatnot. There's no hard and fast rule about distance, but generally you don't shoot decent looking portraits from arm's-length selfie distances.

Further: it's going to be very difficult for software-faked shallow depth of field to handle things like stray hairs, raggedy clothing textiles and other detailed bits against exactly the sort of complex backgrounds that photographers use shallow DoF to throw out of focus in the first place. To the casual observer at relatively low resolution, the faux shallow DoF may appear at least more interesting than no treatment at all, but to an eye that looks at such things even occasionally, it's going to ring false. Further, it's going to be extra-not-good if there's an attempt to apply it to video, looking for a more cinematic result from control of DoF (racking focus, that sort of thing). No, there won't be anybody who bought a $1000 85/1.4 for their Canon or their Nikon suddenly wishing they hadn't because their phone can do the same thing. Just isn't going to happen.

Comment Re:People probably realized.. (Score 1) 319

The first wrist watch ever was built by Pierre Cartier for the brasilian air plane pioneer Alberto Santos-Dumont. It was the "Cartier Santos" in 1904. Your turn.

From Wikipedia: The concept of the wristwatch goes back to the production of the very earliest watches in the 16th century. Elizabeth I of England received a wristwatch from Robert Dudley in 1571, described as an arm watch. The oldest surviving Wristwatch (then described as a bracelet watch) is one made in 1806 and given to Joséphine de Beauharnais.[9] .

There is even an image in the article of an advertising flier for a wristwatch that was in use in the Boer War which began in 1899 and ended 1902.

Comment Re:This is why we need rust (Score 1) 95

Theoretically you could relocate memory periodically in a system like Rust (or Java). This could be done so that the high level doesn't realize it has happened. It might have a fairly heavy performance cost, depending on how frequently the relocations are done and how you detect when you should do them. (scoreboard vs static analysis)

I could write a very simple language/environment where rowhammer is essentially impossible. But it would be very slow. Obvious example is that every address is looked up on a hash table to find the physical address. The application cannot see this hidden hash table, it would allow a byte granularity to relocation instead of a page granularity. It would was a tremendous amount of memory and be very slow. (basically memory layout randomization)

JavaScript itself doesn't necessarily need to be replaced. Replacing it with a similar implementation of Rust doesn't make rowhammer go away. Working around the issue is possible in JS, Rust, Java, Haskell, and a few others. Not practical to work-around in C, but theoretically possible.

If you use SRAM instead of DRAM, there is no performance penalty for layout randomization. Of course, SRAM doesn't have the issue with rowhammer either.

Comment Re:Waiting for the "just as good as a dSLR comment (Score 1) 50

The problem isn't the 'bokeh' of the tiny lens and sensor. That's a discussion about the quality of the out-of-focus area rendering. No, the problem with the tiny sensors and tiny lenses with their very small apertures is that they cannot produce shallow enough depth of field in the first place to even produce an out of focus background in the first place. Basic physics. So there's no point trying to compare the OoF rendering quality (is the bokeh harsh? smooth?) of that tiny platform to a larger format sensor with a quality fast prime lens, because simple physics makes that comparison pointless. That's why they're faking this in software: because there's no physical way to do it with the tiny camera. Light doesn't work that way.

Comment Re:Have fewer babies. (Score 1) 152

Yes, yes. You're either actually a fool, or just pretending to be one so you can score some sort of lazy rhetorical points with an imaginary audience of lower-information-than-you audience.

If you do the things that make you a first-world country, you'll have fewer babies and need fewer resources (like water) so you don't have to chase your tail trying to squeeze water out of the air. As usual, everyone is so paralyzed by political correctness that their afraid to point out that places like India are suffering a culture problem, not a water problem.

Comment Re:Role Reversal (Score 1) 39

Public officials are under more scrutiny than ever.

By a foreign government and not our own 4th-estate or oversight, and current US leaders are willing to rattle the thermonuclear sabres over it...but not Crimea, Ukraine, Syria, etc etc...oh, no! Those little Russian military faux-pas are not sufficient reason to threaten reprisals. But, just release some emails that were supposed to be "polished...with a cloth" and suddenly it's 1962 Cuba.

Kinda tells one where their priorities and loyalties lie, doesn't it?


Comment Re:Please use 'bokeh' in a more useful way (Score 2) 50

Yeah, yeah. That's what the word means. But since it was fashionably inserted into discussions among actual photographers, it's been used in the context of discussing the quality of the blue, not the existence of the blur. It's useful - it's a succinct word that conveys that specific meaning. Trying, here, to preserve that clarity (if you'll pardon the pun) instead of letting it dumb down like so many other terms do.

Comment Re:The Police State expands (Score 3, Insightful) 39

And "privacy experts are concerned!" And the useful idiots think that Mrs. Clinton is their friend.

For decades it's been: "But if we vote 3rd-party/write-in the wrong lizard might get in! We'll just keep voting for the same 2 of them will eventually listen to us!"

"Doing the same thing over and over yet expecting different results is one definition of insanity."


Comment Re:2nd amendment (Score 1) 112

Responding to trespassing tends to grant a fair bit of leeway on property damage and personal injury.

It's still not clear that the FAA is even allowed to consider a drone to be an aircraft, and therefor under their regulatory purview, as this contradicts other parts of the same regulation. AMA is playing it safe and telling all us hobby pilots to register our UAS, but the legality of what has happened is still contested. (perhaps mainly by armchair layers). I think without settling the matter in court and establishing a ruling, we won't really know for certain. If you haven't guessed, I'm in the camp that does not consider hobby RC UAS to be aircraft. (which is true)

Also, I have to point out that flying FPV is still legal. But as most people interpret the regulations it's limited to hobbyists, things get complicated if FPV were to become a competitive televised sport and people start having sponsors. (likely violates FAA at that point)

Comment Re:CSS (Score 1) 315

Who rarely seems to provide it. I very briefly remember websites that offered "Screen", "Print", and a few other options for high-visibility. It was probably too unwieldy of a system so it seems that there is only desktop versus mobile profiles.

If javascript was less of a requirement or at least worked better in lynx & links, I'd probably go back to one of those old fashion text browsers. 90% of my web usage is reading text anyways. (my usage is probably not universal among all web users)

Comment Re:Follow the money... (Score 1) 524

Obamacare reformed the healthcare system.

Obamacare was designed to fail so that the ultimate goal...full government-run, single-provider healthcare...could be rolled out in the US. It was a "Trojan horse" but without any real subterfuge other than propaganda ops shouting down anyone who tried to point this out.

My monthly bill went from $500 per month to $150 per month.

You seem to be the exception rather than the rule. If we actually met IRL you'd be the first person I've ever met whose medical insurance rates went down for a comparable level of coverage due to the ACA.


Comment Please use 'bokeh' in a more useful way (Score 4, Interesting) 50

'Bokeh' is used when referring to the quality of the out-of-focus background (or foreground) of the image, not the fact that it is out of focus. Shallow depth of field images have blurry elements. By definition. But different lenses render that OoF area differently. Some lenses have a jittery, doubled-up, or ring-like pattern, or render OoF highlights as oblong smears or as hard circles. It just depends on the lens design. So when we talk about this, it's about the quality, not the quantity or existence of blurred areas.

Think of it like this: every lens of a given format, focal length and aperture will produce essentially the same mount of OoF areas. It's just physics. The focal plane is where it is, and the meaningfully in-focus area (say, on the subject's face) is going to be a given depth (for a given display size and resolution). Period.

But that's like saying all pianos can play a middle C note. They can. But some sound twangy or harsh, while others sound more pleasing to the ear. Likewise with the OoF rendering by some lenses. With the piano we can say "it plays middle C, but the tone is harsh" - and with the camera, we can say that the lens when wide open can render shallow DoF and thus blur the background, but the bokeh is harsh (or, creamy, or busy, or smooth - whatever... it's the "tone," the visual quality of the blur rendering, generally considered to be more appealing the more creamy it is - though sometimes harsh, nervous bokeh is desireable for certain cinematic moods, etc).

Sorry, pet peeve. "Shallow depth of field" doesn't mean "has bokeh." That's like saying the car's suspension has ride. All cars do! But what's the quality of the ride? More like a sports car, or a limo? Better bokeh usually comes from much higher quality glass, and more of it in the design of the lens. Big, fat, fast prime portrait lenses are built - among other things - to play that visual note more elegantly than cheaper lenses do, even though they both hit the note when told do if they can achieve the same aperture at a given focal length.

Comment Re:Population control (Score -1, Offtopic) 342

So, that's it: how to save the world: bring people out of poverty, give them education, and give them access to birth control.

You don't need the totalitarian bullshit.

But that's hard to do, and besides, it doesn't give TPTB ever more control over people's lives and yet another excuse to pick their pockets at gunpoint while not doing anything that actually addresses the 'problem' but merely transfers wealth to those they favor.

You expect any politician worthy of the name to work to empower and lift people out of poverty? Maybe if we had some statesmen instead of politicians, but Trump!/Clinton!

We're SO hosed!


Comment Re:Have fewer babies. (Score 1) 152

The point is to stop being a third-world country so that - just like throughout the developed world, families don't feel the need to have so many babies to use as slave labor on the farm. There's a reason that countries like the US, or Germany, have their resident populations shrinking. Because people living more prosperously have fewer babies. And thus use far less in the way of resources like water (and especially, use it less wastefully than those who are doing old-school agriculture in a more primitive way). Prosperity makes for smaller families, which relieves stress on resources. So: India needs to stop carrying on like a third world country. Culturally, legally, governmentally, financially, agriculturally. And they will start having fewer babies. And need less water (and food, and energy, and everything else).

Slashdot Top Deals

After the last of 16 mounting screws has been removed from an access cover, it will be discovered that the wrong access cover has been removed.