Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
Forum Games / Re: Visual Counting
« Last post by ella on Today at 03:30:25 AM »
2
Podcast Episodes / Re: Episode #703
« Last post by Beef Wellington on Today at 02:34:36 AM »
I'm really amused that after the CIA people literally told them "we are professional liars", they believed all the BS they got on the Osama story
including a silent helicopter. seriously, a silent helicopter.

You've got to believe to achieve-

3
Podcast Episodes / Re: Episode 705
« Last post by bachfiend on Today at 02:33:48 AM »
CarbShark's suggestion that there is something (undefined) about the geometry of the lenses and how they bend the light that would make motion detection easier (which sounds like speculation), I've still not heard or read anything that even distinguishes the two - other than that one is hexagonal and other tends to be square by default.

That’s not it. Each element of a compound eye is pointed at a slightly different direction. So each is collecting light from a unique segment of the visible field with overlap

If an object is moving it’s movement is going to be apparent in varying degrees by the different receptors.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You were claiming that each ommatidium of a compound eye acts as a pinpoint camera, each providing a complete image of an object, which is what your analogy of taking half a basketball, putting multiple pinholes in it and holding it up to screen and letting the light from the sun pass through it onto the screen.  You’d get multiple images of the sun on the screen.

But that’s not how the ommatidia of a compound eye work.  Each produces a pixel of an object which are stitched together to produce the image of an object, if the animal has conscious awareness (doubtful with bearers of compound eyes).
4
Governments are at least held to treaties and oversight. A private company could probably launch anything they want, which bad actors could potentially tamper with. Then there's this crap-

https://www.popularmechanics.com/space/satellites/a25950681/startrocket-space-billboards/

How about no ads in space? And if you put up an ad in space, your company is dissolved, because fuck you, you don't own it and you should have no right to put your brand on or in it.
5
Podcasts / Re: Opening Arguments #TTTBE
« Last post by CarbShark on January 18, 2019, 11:34:24 PM »
New question and it's a short one.



I'm picking C. I can't see the Doc being liable for something that he had no control over. This should be a product liability issue.
I’m picking A. The dentist was not negligent and wasn’t the products manufacturer


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
6
Podcast Episodes / Re: Episode 705
« Last post by CarbShark on January 18, 2019, 11:29:42 PM »
CarbShark's suggestion that there is something (undefined) about the geometry of the lenses and how they bend the light that would make motion detection easier (which sounds like speculation), I've still not heard or read anything that even distinguishes the two - other than that one is hexagonal and other tends to be square by default.

That’s not it. Each element of a compound eye is pointed at a slightly different direction. So each is collecting light from a unique segment of the visible field with overlap

If an object is moving it’s movement is going to be apparent in varying degrees by the different receptors.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
7
Forum Games / Re: Visual Counting
« Last post by Morvis13 on January 18, 2019, 11:25:29 PM »
9
Podcast Episodes / Re: Episode 705
« Last post by werecow on January 18, 2019, 09:49:50 PM »
(click to show/hide)

I had this thought as well.  It could be that getting a few pixels from a lot of directions is easier to process than millions of pixels from a wide-angle camera because you know the exact direction each pixel is coming from.  I also wonder if the compound eyes the want to put on vehicles are for visible light or are lidar or radar.  I don't see how a visible light compound eye would serve any purpose, but a compound radar eye would be awesome.

But lidar and radar are different from vision in that they require one to actively send out and not just passively receive information, so how would that work? And as to processing a few pixels being easier than millions, one can always subsample in any number of ways. And I don't think compound eyes only pick up on photons coming in from a specific angle. So I don't see the advantage there either. Unfortunately the study is behind a paywall. I wish all science journals were open access.

I thought that each segment in insect eyes had an extremely narrow field of view, making it easy to detect motion, as objects moved rapidly from one segment to the next. The large number of segments, distributed over a hemisphere, gives an overall field of view of half a sphere in each eye, so with two eyes the insect would be able to see in all directions at once.

This was my impression, anyway.

What's the difference between that and detecting motion across pixels across a camera with a wide FOV?

Just a guess here: with about seven brain cells total, bugs don’t have the processing power. But I think what you’re getting at is why would this system be better for computers? And if you find out and tell me then we’ll both know, because I don’t have a clue.

The whole bug-eye camera thing sounds fishy (buggy?) to me because a camera just exposes pixels on a ccd. What’s the advantage of multiple cameras? Which I think is what you’ve been saying.

I think I understand why it works better for bugs. I cannot imagine it being an I provement for cameras and computers.

Yeah, I think we're in agreement. What I'm getting at is that, whether you have a compound eye or a regular camera, if the image is digital it is going to be made up of distinct units. I don't understand what the difference is between something that we call a pixel, and something we call one segment of a compound eye1. In either case you will have light moving across it in any number of ways and you have to infer motion (or lack thereof) from it. In either case you can pre-process the image in any number of ways, whether you are a silicone computer or a carbon based one. I imagine that it is not an insane idea that one could just create a filter that would simulate a compound eye effect either, but let's say we couldn't. What is it that compound eye "pixels", the images they amount to and their aspects, or the lenses through which they are recorded can do or be that regular camera pixels, their result, or their lenses and simple preprocessing filters can not? Other than CarbShark's suggestion that there is something (undefined) about the geometry of the lenses and how they bend the light that would make motion detection easier (which sounds like speculation), I've still not heard or read anything that even distinguishes the two - other than that one is hexagonal and other tends to be square by default.

1To be completely honest I forget the term they mentioned on the podcast, and, as this is Friday and I just came home from organizing a bar meetup, am too2 drunk to be bothered look it up.

2But not too drunk to correct a misuse of "to" when I meant "too". Although in fairness, I wrote that as "tooo" at first. And I wrote "tooo" as "toooo". Maybe I should go to bed.

since I've read the book.

Fortey writes like a poet. }|<o)
10
I knew there had to be something like that. I guess I meant it would probably be harder for a terrorist to tamper with a government satellite as opposed to a private one. Who bears responsibility would matter a bit less if the damage has already been done.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
personate-rain
personate-rain