ElephantsMyAnus

7 ms·

1.
by ElephantsMyAnus 4y ago
How do we know it wasn't already an antique when the ship sank?
2.
by ElephantsMyAnus 4y ago
It needs very unreasonable amount of scrolling.
3.
by ElephantsMyAnus 4y ago
Skin is vital, as you need to deage veins.
4.
by ElephantsMyAnus 4y ago
And that is why nobody wants to find the truth, that the effects are human caused, and not natural.
5.
by ElephantsMyAnus 5y ago
Yeah, it would make more sense to send several telescopes, each a bit better than the one before, but I guess it was easier to get funding for "this revolutionary telescope" than for "this would be like Hubble but a bit bette
6.
by ElephantsMyAnus 5y ago
It's about what kind of competence is favored by the market - it favors people who can get funding, which is not necessarily related to the ability to get the job done.
7.
by ElephantsMyAnus 5y ago
No I'm not doing that, there seems to be some problem specifically there. Either the values are converted incorrectly, or not at all, effectivelly stretching about 8 fstops into the 11.6 (slightly less for video) f-stops of sRGB. You c
8.
by ElephantsMyAnus 5y ago
No that can't be what's happening. You would expect contrast to be lost, not increased, if that was the issue. 8bit sRGB can contain 11.6 f-stops of dynamic range, and it is no longer enough for modern screens. There must be a lon
9.
by ElephantsMyAnus 5y ago
No. It isn't there so that you can use it when you choose to. All devices expect it to be used. When you skip it the colors will be wrong.
10.
by ElephantsMyAnus 5y ago
No, the problem is VERY OBVIOUSLY more severe than that. It's really as if the images were treated as linear, which they are not. (they use gamma correction)
11.
by ElephantsMyAnus 5y ago
The one I was replying to talked about brain processing. Whatever it is doesn't need to and shouldn't be reproduced in photography as the protograph gets processed just like everything else when you look at it. Reality --> eye
12.
by ElephantsMyAnus 5y ago
No it doesn't make sense. You should not be able to capture anything darker than 40, or brighter than 60 if you are limited to 40-60. (actually by the file format, not the sensor, sensors today have higher dynamic ranges than 8 bit sRG
13.
by ElephantsMyAnus 5y ago
No, that does not make any sense. That should result in 40, and everything darker resulting in 40, while 60 and everything brighter resulting in 60. But what you can see is that 40 results in 0, and 60 resulting in 100. That should never ha
14.
by ElephantsMyAnus 5y ago
It is different because it is obvious that shadows are darker than in reality while highlights are much brighter than in reality. Any brain filtering would have to affect the photos as well, even if it was true. No common image format uses
15.
by ElephantsMyAnus 5y ago
It seems to me there must be some kind of error in color calibration of most cameras. They make shadows much darker than they are, and bright areas much brighter than they are. It's not from a lack of dynamic range.
16.
by ElephantsMyAnus 5y ago
Different accents use different vowels, but they remain comprehensible. It's specifically those accents that also change consonants that are taken as hard to understand, such as Scouse.
17.
by ElephantsMyAnus 5y ago
I get that, but it matters very little in a typical sentence. I bet you could understand almost everything with all vowels replaced with schwas.
18.
by ElephantsMyAnus 5y ago
I'm not a native speaker, but, I think it's rather the opposite. It's very inauthentic. English is a rather unusual language that the meaning is mostly carried only by consonants, while vowels are almost meaningless. What act
19.
by ElephantsMyAnus 5y ago
>it would have to follow from certain first-principles, and could reason his way back to the highest level of abstraction, with immense ease. The thinking of geniuses seem to be mastery of simplification, rather than the contrary. The be
20.
by ElephantsMyAnus 5y ago
Yes it is cherry picking. You picked the starting date to make it seem like there was a dramatic rise, while looking further shows a post war dip, and return to "normal". I argued first with the incarceration, which suggests the o
21.
by ElephantsMyAnus 5y ago
But why do you need to cherry pick the data, if it's so clear cut? https://www.econlib.org/archives/2011/06/crime_statistic.htm...
22.
by ElephantsMyAnus 5y ago
I'm arguing here that your views are fuelled by wishful thinking, if not nonsense. You can't turn the world into utopia by sticking to a moral panic triggered by the civil rights movement.
23.
by ElephantsMyAnus 5y ago
The problem is there is no evidence for any crime boom unless you pick the right location and the right beginning year (typically the post war years) or some such contrieved scenario. Even the graph in your second link shows it was complete
24.
by ElephantsMyAnus 5y ago
But there is no decline.
25.
by ElephantsMyAnus 5y ago
They didn't: https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Homicide_Rate_in_N... https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2016/01/14/national/crime-...
26.
by ElephantsMyAnus 5y ago
Maybe the tougher sentences worked? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_the_United_States#/...
27.
by ElephantsMyAnus 5y ago
But you agree that it needs an explanation, right? You gloat about a dramatic decrease in crime, yet the number of inmates increased tenfold over that time period.
28.
by ElephantsMyAnus 5y ago
Really? It looks like the complete opposite happened: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_the_United_States#/me...
29.
by ElephantsMyAnus 5y ago
Yes. It's too bad that politicians got corrupted as usual. Not in all countries though, many have shut it down.
30.
by ElephantsMyAnus 5y ago
No. In terms it's worse as it's worse. It ends up forgotten once the last patents expire and there is no value to salvage anymore. It's nothing but sunk cost fallacy that should have been stopped back in the 90s before money

More ›