Re: xkcd: CrowdStrike

On 2024-08-06 16:18:38 +0000, Paul S Person said:

On Tue, 6 Aug 2024 13:27:49 +1200, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
wrote:

On 2024-08-05 16:19:41 +0000, Paul S Person said:

On Mon, 5 Aug 2024 09:02:17 +1200, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
wrote:

On 2024-08-04 15:54:51 +0000, Paul S Person said:

On Sun, 4 Aug 2024 18:14:35 +1200, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
wrote:

On 2024-08-04 03:14:42 +0000, Lynn McGuire said:

<snip>

 Much of the blame also should go to the moron Elon Muskrat, who>>> keeps>telling everyone it is "self-driving" when it is definitely NOT!>>> Even>his own Tesla emplyees tell him it's crap. He also insists that>>> the>Tesla cars only use cameras while every other company is using>>> things>like lidar too (not that it makes their self-driving any better>>> either).

 The same could be said of using "3D" for "stereoscopy" when they are
clearly distinguishable.
I realize that the terminology here is very confused: I am using "3D"
here to refer to what we (well, most of us) see with our own eyes when
we look around as opposed to stereoscopy and also to 3D animation
which produces some fine effects but is not stereoscopy. My favorite
illustration of the difference is this:
 if you watch a stereoscopic film in which, say, a paddle-ball ball is
sent directly into your face "out of the screen", it will be aimed at
your face no matter where you are sitting
 if a /real/ paddle-ball ball were sent out to the audience, some would
see it coming at them, others along side them, and some above (or,
when balconies existed, below) them -- you would see different things
depending on where you are sitting

 That is partly done on purpose to make *you* feel you're in the film,>rather than the cinema, but of course technical limitations play the>biggest part ... currently.
 No doubt some cinema will use AR/VR-style headsets to give the audience>different viewpoints depending on where they are sitting. Could be good>for those watching something like a sports event or music concert, but>it doesn't really work for a normal movie since it is irrelevant where>you are in relation to others watching.
  

Another difference, of course, is that just seeing the world in 3D
doesn't make most people throw up. Sterescopic films are known the do
that. Although, to be some Cinerama/Cinemiracle films did as well, at
least when projected so that all you saw was the film (no screen
boundaries visible).

 I can only play 3D computer games for a few minutes before I start>getting motion sick. If I continue to play, I end up with an extremely>bad headache and bad nausea. Even just watching gameplay trailers>starts making me feeling sick too.
 Same if I try to read books or maps (as a passenger of course) in a moving car.
 I've never bothered trying to watch a 3D movie.

 Neither have I ... in the sense I suspect you intended: as a 3D movie.
 I've seen (and own) several that were released as "3D" movies.
/Creature from the Black Lagoon/ comes with a trailer proudly
proclaiming it as the first 3D movie to be filmed underwater. /Dial
"M" for Murder/ is (AFAIK) Hitchcock's one and only forey into"3D" (that's why the image has the woman's hand pointing at you: it no
doubt extends from the screen in "3D"). /Coraline/ is not only "3D";
the DVD comes with a packet of "red/blue" paper eyeglasses and has two
sides: one "3D" and the other the side I watch. And of course
Argento's /Dracula/ and /Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2/
are "3D". And there are many many others.
 But I watch none of them in 3D. I have my own glasses and don't need a
second pair to fix the blurriness of the film. (I am relying here on a
scene in /The A-Team/ which depicts what a "3D" film looks like
without the glasses.)
 /Coraline/ is interesting because it points out the /real/ purpose of
"home 3D": to make money by requiring a new, special BD player and a
new, special TV set -- neither of which was necessary, just a
properly-prepared disk. But that's just how it goes nowadays.

Our main TV does have a setting for 3D (despite being too small a screen size for it to be remotely useful), but I've never even bothered to look at what it does, let alone use it. It probably uses some gimmickry to turn normal 2D shows / movies into pseudo-3D, which would be even worse than those filmed as 3D.