I'm so glad I have a custom style, with the best font ever made
Flips
@Flips
Best posts made by Flips
-
RE: April Fools Day is leaking?
-
RE: Stardock, Star Control, I'm in space?
@Lorne-Kates said in Stardock, Star Control, I'm in space?:
Fuck both of them and buy Star Citizen!
The most expensive and longest running joke of the gaming history.
"Fuck all of them and buy Duke Nukem Forever!" -
RE: TRWTF is the entire JS ecosystem
Can someone point me to the 'PHP == TR ' so I can post this article and
-
RE: Avatar Gifting Thread
@Tsaukpaetra
Awww, I almost felt special :(I'ld better find me a new avatar, so I can leave this period of emotional negligence behind.
-
RE: For security purposes, customer service needs to see your password
@ben_lubar said in For security purposes, customer service needs to see your password:
<Image: [password] shouldn't contain [...] anything that would be in your wallet>
ERROR: Password not secure enough, number '1' was found in your wallet.
@Tsaukpaetra said in For security purposes, customer service needs to see your password:
AFEBB01AA3. This password is burned into my memory, apparently, because it was part of the data from before the personality split event.
I still remember my Windows '98 password. Most useless memory ever. Specially because it seems read-only.
-
RE: The Flyer's new mascot is the stuff of nightmares
[edit]
But still beats this one by a long shot
#20: Mr. Testicles, Everton
-
RE: Gąska is a tart savour and wants to give floating jobs to Javascript
@levicki said in Gąska is a tart savour and wants to give floating jobs to Javascript:
[...] I am not amused. [...]
I can read that in every post you make.
Latest posts made by Flips
-
RE: Australia Tax: the price of international routing
@Gribnit said in Australia Tax: the price of international routing:
@Luhmann yup. Next time you die, you'll be standing somewhere in there.
Unlike the last time he died.
-
RE: Australia Tax: the price of international routing
@kazitor said in Australia Tax: the price of international routing:
I wonder if I can bankrupt these companies by just hard-refreshing their storefronts over and over.
I tried. Did not work.
[realistic]
Steam regional prices confirms Australia is #1 cash-cow.besides: They show Steam has multiple tiers of prices for European countries, which (I assume) is against the law.
[edit]
Does Steam's dashboard/tool displays expected product or monetary value? Maybe some feedback-loop between such tool, selling gamedevelopers, and buying customers, created these big differences. -
RE: Computer vision system can be fooled by handwritten notes
Ah, a good preserved article from the previous century
Did someone mention the solution? It's readable on Distill.
This research is probably the source, of the verge imagery. Includes many more examples and how to counteract this type of attack.
Has many interesting topics. Mostly about the results of their network. Seems it organizes relational images and texts, into 'concept-neurons'. and how useful it's representation is.
ps includes pics and a partial playground for the kids, like me
[edit]
Pff, skipped over boomzilla his post, somehow. But this article is still worth mentioning it, because of it's value. -
RE: Unreal claims concerning purple
@aitap said in Unreal claims concerning purple:
So the real (natural) colour space is "all possible spectral functions
P(λ)
" and the colours we perceive (with our puny(X,Y,Z)
tristimuli instead of infinite amounts of infinitely small buckets ofΔλ
) are all fake, then? I hope I understand you correctly this time.Our eyesight just has some purple-colory side-effects of fitting it's XYZ vector on a 1-dimensional function. And yes, apparently I believe that color-perception in itself is fake.
I could argue that stimuli and perceiving those, are by definition a translation (interpretation) of the actual experience (receiving the stimuli by photon). Or that by definition, light could be perceived in a non-visual way (like having a skin which tickles dependent on light perceived), which is coded without any notion of color.
Very useless to argue for so I won't.I argue that our eyes interpret signals in context of previous ones (cone-saturation) and interpret averages over timespans (gray-scaling), so our eyes in itself, interpret the same color, differently, depending on our state.
A human is just the worst measuring-stick, science can use.
@cvi said in Unreal claims concerning purple:
You should read up on black body radiation / thermal radiation. In short, it's generated by thermal motion, not from e.g. electron decay from discrete states.
I understand. I assume we can break that non-atomic operation down, to the point that 'every different wavelength is produced by a different internal state and/or process, and the complete spectrum we see consists of millions of these processes happening with millions of particles, at the same time'.
Don't get me wrong. I am way out of line here, if I compare my knowledge with some of you. Hell, I can't even define what I mean with a natural process, as it differs in many ways on many scales.
So as a request: I would love to see some kind of natural process in whichProcess(objects [2..inf]) -> [2..inf] photons + restproducts
where all photons are a result from the starting process, not from any sub-process, nor dependent on the others' creation. -
RE: Unreal claims concerning purple
@cvi said in Unreal claims concerning purple:
@Flips said in Unreal claims concerning purple:
When it's produced, no.
No, when it's produced too. Black body radiation is (as mentioned) broad-spectrum. It's the number one source of light (mainly because the sun outshines everything else by unfunny amounts).
The black body would have multiple states in which different processes, create different wavelengths.
If you're talking about singular photons, the first part of your statements makes no sense. Singular photons have a single wavelength/frequency, so they will be single wavelength when they reach our eyes as well.
You are totally right. The photon still is monochromatic. I only tried to claim, that light we see in our lifes, is from multiple sources and as such it would be an exception when you can perceive a monochromatic color in it's true glory (without surrounding noise).
When we argue for a 100% isolated case (a LED on steroids), we maybe can conclude that for some power supply over x time, all energy went in the process exiting 1 or multiple electrons, and all energy came out in the form of light with the same amount of energy (hence, all light had the same frequency, regardless of empirical measurement-variances).
(b) There are always minor variations to everything in the real world. Even in a perfect system, you still have to deal with uncertainty. In a real-world system, you additionally have all sorts of noise (thermal, ...). This isn't a measurement variance; "imperfect" measurements just add on top.
Uncertainty already starts at power supply. If we can't input with deterministic accuracy, how can we conclude that the output does not correspond to the input, with deterministic accuracy? Not to mention we need to measure the complete state as well. For every planck's length and dT (preferably less).
Possible? No. Feasible? Yes. When you're a determinist.
-
RE: Unreal claims concerning purple
@cvi said in Unreal claims concerning purple:
@Flips said in Unreal claims concerning purple:
But that complete spectrum, did not come from 1 source, so it would be a mistake to think, that there exist objects who emit more then 1 frequency at the same time.
Monochromatic light is rather the exception than the rule.
When it reaches your eye? yes. When it's produced, no.
Black body radiation (=sunlight) is full-spectrum. Most materials have more than one absorption/emission line.
But only when you bombard them with energy.
LEDs/Lasers are the exception here, where the emitted light is often quite narrow-band (though it's possible to construct LEDs that have multiple or even wide emission bands).
The question becomes how you'd even define "1 frequency". Take something like an Na-lamp (Sodium vapour lamp). These are often considered to be monochromatic, but they actually emit at two distinct frequencies, 589nm ad 589.56nm. And both of those peaks also have a certain width.
defining it is easier then observing it. Take your lamp:
Power goes in. Light, heat, friction, chemical reactions, come out.
Which (concrete) processes are there, and which are responsible for which frequency?When we argue for a 100% isolated case (a LED on steroids), we maybe can conclude that for some power supply over x time, all energy went in the process exiting 1 or multiple electrons, and all energy came out in the form of light with the same amount of energy (hence, all light had the same frequency, regardless of empirical measurement-variances).
-
RE: Unreal claims concerning purple
@aitap said in Unreal claims concerning purple:
I guess the problem boils down to whether "a real colour" is
- a tristimulus / a point in a colour space (with a separate holy war on which colour space represents "real" colours), i.e. something that happens in the head, with @kazitor supporting this point in the CIE XYZ colour space
- a single wavelength, which seems to be the point preferred by @Flips
- the spectrum (as a real-valued function of wavelength) of visible-range electromagnetic radiation emitted, reflected or transmitted by an object that reaches the observer in a given point in space, which is the definition that some spectroscopists I know like the most
- something else
But no sir. I do view the complete spectrum as real color space. But that complete spectrum, did not come from 1 source, so it would be a mistake to think, that there exist objects who emit more then 1 frequency at the same time. A spectrum is more like a statistical analysis on a group of said objects.
But my point is:
When you see light, you can't determine the constituent frequencies based on how you perceive the color of that light. There seem to be multiple ways to 'construct light' which look the same but have different properties.
And apparently this phenomenon is basis to discerning real (natural) colors, and that imaginary family of purples, as those fakey ones are not represented on the spectrum, only in our brain.Come to think of it.. It's actually the same as the black/white discussion.
Flips retroactively upvotes all previous posts -
RE: Unreal claims concerning purple
@dkf said in Unreal claims concerning purple:
@Flips said in Unreal claims concerning purple:
there is no single (lightwave) frequency which would exite both red and blue cones in our eyes
So, where is the purple?
-
RE: Unreal claims concerning purple
@error said in Unreal claims concerning purple:
[...]
It seems there are multiple sets of imaginary colors, dependent on the source and target.
Your article talks about the hyperbolic colors, but starts off with a composite of all colors (white) instead of the opposite color only (as appearing in wiki's infographic).
Most interesting for me is the stygian set of colors. You superimpose color on an image where color is 100% absent, which is in line with the article: Our visual state gets saturated and continues to send signals, after the visual input has stopped.
-
RE: Unreal claims concerning purple
@kazitor said in Unreal claims concerning purple:
Called it!
@Flips said in Unreal claims concerning purple:
Purple only exists as a combined light of red and blue
@kazitor said in Unreal claims concerning purple:
On an entirely unrelated note, here’s an empirical approximation of the appearance of 420 nm light.
C'monnnn, the least you could do is offer something beyond the pre-emptive canned responses!
I still don't understand why the unrelated note about some violet will help us identify a purple
ps About your infographic; Every object can only have real colors. But when emitted these colors get interfered with, which shapes them into fake colors. This will be true for 100% of light we experience on a daily basis.