pouët.net

Unlimited Detail Technology

category: offtopic [glöplog]
Well this thread changed course entertainingly.
added on the 2013-05-28 15:05:18 by Gargaj Gargaj
According to a professor I had (I didn't like him and he died of cancer... this is the only thing I remember him saying) in one coast of America people spell router like "rooter" and in the other one they spell it like "rawter".
added on the 2013-05-28 16:57:43 by xernobyl xernobyl
Incorrect pronunciation? Maybe he's French? :D
added on the 2013-05-28 17:47:46 by baah baah
I am a brit and I say daytah.
added on the 2013-05-28 19:45:45 by fizzer fizzer
i am german and i say dahta, but i see how it could rhyme with later
added on the 2013-05-28 21:03:50 by vectory vectory
"You say Dahta... I say dayta" ... "rooter, router"
Let's call the whole thing off

Personally I had to listen to that video muted, not because of the pronunciation, but from the tone and cadence of the voice.
For sure, that guy will never land a job in the audio book business.
added on the 2013-05-28 21:15:44 by T21 T21
you say pieces of music... i say musics
added on the 2013-05-29 08:28:22 by linde linde
T21: I dunno - could be a niche market there... Not the traditional 50 Shades of Grey you are used to with polygons, but UNLIMITED Shades of Grey...
added on the 2013-05-29 08:55:33 by bloodnok bloodnok
At least someone I know from the east coast in the US pronounces "router" somehow like "rahder". It took a while to figure out what he meant (which was out of any context, on a sentence like "i need to go buy a router for my father-in-law").

I'd have always pronounced it like "rooter", but then again, I'm a spaniard and my pronounciation is basically shitty :-)
added on the 2013-05-29 09:21:18 by Jcl Jcl
Quote:
At least give them credit for implicitly admitting that the only thing their tech can do well is render a static point cloud efficiently and finding a niche for it. :)

kb: this could efficiently replace Google Street View AND C3 Technologies maps (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gSmunh6NIQI); although, question is how much time and effort is needed to produce complete 3D voxel model of city...
C3 claims, for one square kilometre: 3 hours for airplane recording and same amount of time for post-computing (but I would say it take far more than that, since Apple is quite slow on adding new 3D cities to map).
added on the 2013-05-29 09:30:09 by calimero calimero
voxels arent pointclouds, darling
added on the 2013-05-29 10:12:41 by Maali Maali
so what have they actually got here..? a hierarchical structure for storing static point clouds? like, say, a k-d tree where each cell contains an average colour of the points below it in the hierarchy, and once you traverse down to a small enough cell in screen space you use that colour?

and they can generate this tree at a rate of 3.5 billion points per hour: i.e. an amazing 1 million points per second in non-hyperbole speak? (i can insert 1 million points PER FRAME into a sparse octree structure on GPU)

woop de fucking do. :) this took 10 years?


added on the 2013-05-29 10:33:11 by smash smash
smash: "but everyone knows that the demoscene is the bleeding edge of CG!!!!1112"
maybe we can get this guy to do voiceovers for demos :)
added on the 2013-05-29 10:38:09 by smash smash
every tech that has no use in the porn industry will go down anyway so who cares?
added on the 2013-05-29 10:58:19 by pro pro
Wait, are you implying unlimited genital detail wouldn't revolutionise the market?

smash, did you consider that they could actually do something more complicated?
added on the 2013-05-29 11:16:17 by msqrt msqrt
msqrt: HD is disgusting enough, thank you. :)
added on the 2013-05-29 11:28:05 by kb_ kb_
This is now a thread where two people have independently used the phrase "woop de fucking do".

That is all.
added on the 2013-05-29 12:33:07 by gloom gloom
I can see only one use
Granted, I spelled it differently.
added on the 2013-05-29 14:14:34 by gloom gloom
people using the same phrase, well... woop de fucking do!
added on the 2013-05-29 14:23:25 by Maali Maali
woop de fucking poo
added on the 2013-05-29 15:48:09 by Optimus Optimus
found it
@smash: It's probably just a variant of QSplat - build a BVH of some description and traverse it front to back until you encounter either a leaf or a boundary volume projecting to smaller than one pixel.

For subpixel accuracy the QSplat method took 8.3 seconds - thirteen years ago! Applying Moore's law gives you a nice 20ms per frame for the same quality today.
http://graphics.stanford.edu/papers/qsplat/

Euclideon's claims that the rendering speed is only limited by the number of pixels and not the number of points is definitely false, since you cannot produce a data structure containing an arbitrary number of points and traverse it in constant time. Also, the claim in their newest video that they can process data on disk without reading it into memory is the most ridiculous description of a hierarchical data structure I've ever heard - someone should call Intel and tell them someone found a new addressing mode in x86 that can read directly from disk!
added on the 2013-05-30 13:31:13 by Noobody Noobody
Maybe they're running off SSD.
added on the 2013-05-30 13:32:18 by Gargaj Gargaj

login