"Roughly speaking, a resolution of 250,000 times that of HDTV is necessary, operating at several hundred petaFLOPS per second, to create moving holograms with HD resolution."
Paul Prudence, Super Vision, HOLO 1 (via notgames)
Fake, phone-attacking cell-towers are all across America
The towers attack the baseband radio in your phone and use it to hack the OS; they’re only visible if you’re using one of the customized, paranoid-Android, post-Snowden secure phones, and they’re all around US military bases.
"Seventeen mysterious cellphone towers have been found in America which look like ordinary towers, and can only be identified by a heavily customized handset built for Android security – but have a much more malicious purpose, according to Popular Science. The fake ‘towers’ – computers which wirelessly attack cellphones via the “baseband” chips built to allow them to communicate with their networks, can eavesdrop and even install spyware, ESD claims. They are a known technology - but the surprise is that they are in active use. The towers were found by users of the CryptoPhone 500, one of several ultra-secure handsets that have come to market in the last couple of years, after an executive noticed his handset was “leaking” data regularly."
"Although there is a traditional way of designing flat patterns which considers the movement of the body and characteristics of the material, computers design it in a totally different way, because they recognize the 3D shape as a polygon which is a collective form of flat faces.
Our purpose for this “Computed Copy” is not only to make some distortion which humans cannot produce, but also to make garments which are not just “copy” and have the alternative creativity. By removing humans’ arbitrariness as much as possible from the process of copying designs, and by letting computers do it, we can create a new kind of designing system.
In the future, we think that it will be possible to copy a garment only with the image files on the internet without scanning actual things, thanks to the rapid development of 3D technology (scanning, modeling, and printing) and a flood of images on the internet. We expect that this work will be the fastest automated way of copying the designs as the final destination of fast fashion.”
Exhibited at Materializing II
Clive Thompson’s says that there are three principal biases that today’s digital tools introduce to human thought.
First, they allow for prodigious external memory: smartphones, hard drives, cameras, and sensors routinely record more information than any tool before them. We’re shifting from a stance of rarely recording our ideas and the events of our lives to doing it habitually.
Second, today’s tools make it easier for us to find connections—between ideas, pictures, people, bits of news—that were previously invisible.
Third, they encourage a superfluity of communication and publishing.
This last feature has many surprising effects that are often ill understood. Any economist can tell you that when you suddenly increase the availability of a resource, people do more things with it, which also means they do increasingly unpredictable things. As electricity became cheap and ubiquitous in the West, its role expanded from things you’d expect—like nighttime lighting—to the unexpected and seemingly trivial: battery driven toy trains, electric blenders, vibrators.
The superfluity of communication today has produced everything from a rise in crowd-organized projects like Wikipedia to curious new forms of expression: television-show recaps, map-based storytelling, discussion threads that spin out of a photo posted to a smartphone app, Amazon product-review threads wittily hijacked for political satire. Now, none of these three digital biases is immutable, because they’re the product of software and hardware, and can easily be altered or ended if the architects of today’s tools (often corporate and governmental) decide to regulate the tools or find they’re not profitable enough. But right now, these big effects dominate our current and near-term landscape.Go read this, pls.
"But it is also constrained at the level of social and political possibility. Emoji are terrible at depicting diversity: on Apple’s iOS platform, for example, there are many white faces, but only two seem Asian and none are black. Responding to public outcry, Apple now says it is “working closely with the Unicode Consortium in an effort to update the standard.”"
Is free and open source 3D modeling software library in Java for computational design in architecture, product design, interaction design and more. iGeo is designed to provide functionality of code-based 3D modeling, practicality of use in computational design practice and extensibility to cooperate with other data processing components and real-time input/output interaction interfaces to other various media in Java.
If you use YouTube, you need to know this.
You’ve heard all these rumblings about Net Neutrality over the past several months. Let’s get real: this is about controlling online video. It is estimated that by 2017, video content will account for 80-90% of all global Internet traffic.
This isn’t just about not being able to binge-watch a series on Netflix. It’s about the future of online video as we know it.
Whether your YouTube channel is home to daily vlogs, short films, or just that one video from when the cinnamon challenge seemed like a good idea, you’re a video creator. Your content and comments help shape this community. Let’s keep it that way.
Net Neutrality means that your YouTube videos reach people at the same speed as clips from last night’s episode of the Tonight Show. It means a level playing field for video creators looking to reach an audience. But new Net Neutrality rules could mess that up.
Here’s the deal: Telecommunications companies already charge us to access the Internet through our homes and our phones. New FCC rules could allow them to also charge content providers (like YouTube, Netflix, and even PBS) for access to our eyeballs. It could create a fast lane for Jimmy Fallon’s clips, and slow lane for your YouTube videos.
It is really important that the FCC understands that online video creators care about Net Neutrality. Even if you’ve only ever uploaded ONE VIDEO, you are a creator and you have a voice.
If you can, please add your channel to our petition. We’ll deliver this to the FCC in September and demonstrate that the online video community cares about this issue.
Amazon textbook rentals: fine-print bans taking books over state lines
If you thought Google deleting your ebooks when you cross a border is unreasonable, check this out: Amazon’s textbook rental service comes with fine-print that allows the company to bill your credit card for the full amount if they think you’ve crossed a state line with it. It’s not clear exactly what’s going on here, but all signs point to this being part of Amazon’s strategy for avoiding having to pay state sales-tax.
state of the art face tracking for digital avatars.
I ONCE HAD the pleasure of hearing a historically informed performance of a Bach sonata played on an organ made by master builder John Brombaugh. Brombaugh organs are tuned in what is called unequal temperament. It is a bizarrely little-known fact, but today’s tuning standard, equal temperament, is a relatively modern system. To hear Glenn Gould plunk away at Bach on a piano is a historical goof. Today, if confronted with Gould performing his music on a contemporary instrument, Bach would most likely wonder, “Why is this Canadian guy playing my compositions out of tune?” Like computer software, music is a set of instructions performed in real time on various instruments, and like all technologies, parts of these systems can become obsolete—even something as common as what we hear as C major. Moreover, technology—like taste—does not necessarily proceed in a straight line. If we traveled back to the 1700s and heard Bach play, we might just as easily ask, “Why is he playing his own stuff out of tune?” Hierarchies of authenticity might be best considered relative.
A historically informed setting for the images discovered by this preservation effort would dictate that the following real-time systems be strung together: Warhol’s images would be need to be visualized in real time and in real space by a period- specific, analog, cathode-ray-tube Amiga monitor hooked up to an Amiga 1000 running the specific version of GraphiCraft found on Warhol’s disk, booted using Amiga Kickstart 26.7, all running on US 110V, 60Hz power. This is the only performance of these sketches that would be 100 percent accurate to 1985. The images you see reproduced here are renderings of the raw digital files for contemporary print and Web—a Gould version, if you will. Luckily, though, we might be on the right track, because the performance of these images is not entirely limited to a given medium, technology, or period, any more than an image can exist as a true original, as Warhol knew better than anyone. In 1986, when asked how he would like to see his sketches displayed, Warhol replied, “Well, we could get a printout. I could just print this out if we had the printer.” I hope he would have been OK with making a few thousand copies.