Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! ×

Comment Re:Vive owner's thoughts on Rift vs Vive (Score 1) 141

The aliasing that I saw was kind of weird, could have been the earlier hardware or the software demo that was running on it. The "pixels" that were visible was not a regular grid of squares. They looked like a tessalating pattern, where each pixel in the image had a shape that looked like several smaller rectangles glued together. The overall effect was like looking at a textile "mesh" or a screendoor close up.

The other unit that I played with was a newer chinese unit (I forget the brand name). It had integrated eye tracking and more sophisticated software. In that unit the image just looked chunky - i.e. A regular pixel grid that was slightly out of focus. The effect was similar to rendering a lo-res image and upscaling it through a bicubic filter, although I guess the blurring was from a physical part of the system rather than a filtering step.

I'm looking forward to trying out the consumer units to see how they look.

Comment Re:Vive owner's thoughts on Rift vs Vive (Score 1) 141

I tried a rift at work last week (think it was DR2). The low quality shocked me, horrific lens distortion and chunky grating pixelation. People seem to have different tolerances for resolution, but I would say that it needs to double to be comfortable to use. At current resolutions it feels horrific.

Relative levels of quality between the rift and the vive are interesting: but the absolute level seems too low on this first generation (personal opinion obviously, YMMV). I'm still looking forward to trying Project Cars on a vive to see what it can do.

The head tracking was flawless on the systems that I've tried so far - immersion was spot on. But I'm surprised that resolution felt like such a deal breaker. It is probably adaption from switching to 4k panels at work and at home. Driving higher resolution at 90hz will probably take a couple of gfx card generations. I hope your early adoption tax gives it enough momentum to see what a 2nd or 3rd generation product looks like.

Comment I blame "whole word reading". (Score 3, Interesting) 151

I blame "whole word reading".

Pople who learned to read that way simply do not read for pleasure. They read when they are required to do so, but not otherwise.

If you are a "whole word reader", and you encounter a word you've never seen before, it's off to the dictionary to look up the new ideogram (since that how the words are taught using that method), even if you actually use the word daily when speaking.

I've occasionally wondered if we are going to have to make books available in "text speak", in the same way that we make them available in braille, in order to comply with the Americans With Disabilities act.

Comment Re:"Build better bridges" (Score 1) 129

I'm pretty sure the Romans thought their empire was going to last forever, and built based on that eventuality.

So what you're arguing is that the Romans would have build just as ephemerally as we do, even though they didn't expect to be ephemeral, had slaves, and didn't have labor unions that needed make-work contracts to keep the workers happy.

By "selection bias", you are referring to the Romans killing engineers and architects who built things that fell down, leaving only non-dead engineers and architects to design and build new things, right?

Comment "Build better bridges" (Score 2) 129

"Build better bridges".

Not really. The better we've become at engineering, the more we cut the bridge designs from "massively overbuilt, in such a way as to endure they never fall apart" to replace them with "barely overbuilt, in such a way as the first storm slightly out of the overage tolerance we've allowed will cause everything to be destroyed".

Seems stupid.

Rather than trying to figure out how to cut our tolerances as close to the bone as possible, we should probably go back to massively overbuilding things -- and then use our knowledge of tolerances to *ensure* they are massively overbuilt.

If we did that, we wouldn't have things like the 2007 I-35W bridge collapse happening. The bridges might sink into the ground under their own weight, but they wouldn't be collapsing.

Comment There's several options. (Score 4, Funny) 415

There's several options.

(1) Don't use a lot of password protected services; that way: less to remember.

(2) Live with being occasionally hacked.

(3) The Bratva solution: someone hacks you, send someone to shoot them in the head.

I don't know about you, but I'm kind of partial to #1, with #3 being a close second. I don't particularly like #2.

Comment You actually can't do this. (Score 2) 337

No longer UC's property, no longer UC's problem. And still available to whoever may wish to view it.

You actually can't do this.

Trying to put something in the public domain to get out from under legal liability is the reason things like the MIT and BSD license exist: in order to attach a hold harmless clause, you have to assert Copyright, such that the only terms on which the content may be legally used is via agreement to the terms of the license.

It's unfortunate that there is not a blanket hold harmless exception for works placed in the public domain, but there's none. It's very difficult to make something actually public domain, these days.

Slashdot Top Deals

Usage: fortune -P [-f] -a [xsz] Q: file [rKe9] -v6[+] file1 ...

Working...