h a l f b a k e r y
Not so much a thought experiment as a single neuron misfire.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
or get an account
Many people have, as their mobile
phone ringtone, something which sounds
like an old-fashioned non-mobile phone
which had actual bells inside which
were hit with a tiny vibrating hammer.
This is pleasing to the ear (at least,
more so than many mobile phone
ringtones) and a nice nod to the
venerable history of electronic
glaring problem with these electronic
simulations of the sound of physical
bells (and you will notice this every
time you hear it, now that I've
pointed it out) is that when the
person receiving the call presses the
button or swipes or whatever to pick
up the call ("pick up" itself being a
reference to phones with handsets) the
computer-generated bell noise cuts off
instantly whereas, with a real phone
with physical bells being hit by a
hammer, the hammer would stop hitting
the bells but the sound of the bell
which had just been struck would
sustain* for a few seconds. This flaw in the
simulated bell sound is
(a) annoying, and (b) grossly lazy on
the part of phone designers
this idea is that we should use the
vast processing power of modern phones
to better simulate the bell sound in
these ringtones, and generate a
gradually decaying bell chime which continues for a
second or two after the call is answered.
(*Nigel Tufnel: The sustain, listen to
Marty DiBergi: I don't hear anything.
Nigel Tufnel: Well you would though,
if it were playing)
||Having been enrolled into the OptOut scheme for bunning, and finding no fault with this idea, I hereby [+]
||[+] Obviously the simulation should be taken further, the
call can be ended in the normal manner, but if the DA is on
your ass and the chief has given you 8 hours to nail the perp,
you need to end calls more forcefully, with a nice little
||"The bells ! The bells ! "
||Maybe a 'slam phone' sort of hangup button on the next
||You just had to go and spoil it, didn't you, [bh] ?
||It's not big, and it's not clever.
||25 FPS was determined by the limitations of mechanical film
transports and the strength of the film itself, plus the persistence
of vision that gives an acceptable illusion of smooth motion.
||For TV, that meant that to show movies the frame and line rates
had to somehow be matched to the film, since in the early days
of TV, magnetic tape was uncommon, and a lot of material was
on cine film.
||It's rather like the 4' 8 1/2" rail gauge- it's what worked in the
beginning, and now you're stuck with it.
||Once the smoothness is obtained, isn't how much the individual can subconsciously catch?
||So a 4K brain means the 4K absorb-able differential between frames at 60 FPS. Then again, just watch it again.
||Depth comes from doing more time, seeing nuances. If it interested then it is possibly worth getting more out. A second viewing, then again, may totally reverse the initial view.
||[8th] //It's rather like the 4' 8 1/2" rail gauge// -
the rail gauge measurement derives from the distance
between the neck and ankles of the SI damsel in