Nerd Alert: Sept 6, 2017

In Membership, Nerd Alert - On Demand by Gigi Manukyan6 Comments

Kim Horcher and Brett Erlich talk Star Wars’ new addition, “BB-9E,” new NASA administrator being a well-known climate change denier, Stranger Things creators going after new motion enhancement default on televisions, KFC’s “smile to pay,” “lest trustworthy” atheists, whether or not you can learn in your sleep, and mixed reviews on Steam.

0 seconds of 39 minutes, 18 secondsVolume 90%
Press shift question mark to access a list of keyboard shortcuts
00:00
39:18
39:18
 

Comments

  1. Regarding the audio jack, I prefer that they keep it. Every morning when I tune into my shows, on my iPad, I use a blue tooth headset. After 3 hours, it dies. I already have my wired ear buds plugged in for when If have to recharge the Bluetooth wireless. I want that option.

  2. Regarding the atheist segment: I think for atheist to be trusted more, they would first need to make an attempt to find religion, learn about it, meditate on it, then leave it and become an apostate. Sounds much better than an atheist. At least you have a leg to stand on when you know the scriptures better than people that go to church every Sunday. I also personally feel atheist would not be greeted with such hostility as the religious zealot will want to know what made you lose your faith. And that’s when you hit them. Instead of being on the defensive or offensive when faced with an atheist, the religious zealot is being regaled with tales of how his myths and fairy tales are utter bullshit. Take the staunches Christians you can find. Tell them their 15 year old daughter is pregnant or a husband that his virgin wife is pregnant. NO ONE IN THEIR RIGHT MINDS WOULD BELIEVE THE HOLY SPIRIT KNOCKED THOSE GIRLS UP! THEY’D WANT TO KNOW WHO THEY FUCKIN’! PLAIN AND SIMPLE. IT IS 2017. BABIES ONLY GET MADE ONE WAY outside of a science intervening in which we’d be talking aliens in the Bible. Far more plausible than the what’s been sold to people on Sundays.

  3. I hate that they say 24fps is more “cinematic”, as if that’s a valid argument. Just because decades ago it was decided that 24 fps is the minimum amount of frames needed for images to seem in motion for our brain in a darkened invironment, doesn’t mean it’s better than any other amount of frames.

    Now most TVs motion interpolation algorithms are crap and you shouldn’t use them. Doesn’t mean that all algorithms are crap. Some guys at Portland State U just wrote a paper on an exciting interpolation algorithm via adaptive separable convolution and the results so far seem great. Currently it needs 0.9s for a single 1080p frame using a GeForce Titan X, so it’s too slow for now, but could be something great for the future.

    Of course if we could get more filmmaker to shoot in 48fps or 50fps or 60fps in the first place, we wouldn’t need those alogrithms in the first place. I think most filmmakers don’t even think about upping fps, simply because it’s more expensive. You’d need more storage, more processing power, hence post production would be slower and more expensive. Most studios don’t even master their stuff in 4K, even though their content was shot in 4K, sometimes even 5K or 6K, so increasing fps is probably not even on their radar.

    Anyways, needed to rant about this a bit.

    So yes, when you set up TVs at comic-con, don’t use the TVs motion interpolation functions with content that the filmmakers spent months to make, but on the other hand, don’t give me bullshit about how 24fps looks more “cinematic”. If it was shot at 24fps, show it at 24fps, but if it was shot at higher fps in the first place, it would look better.

  6. I was unaware of the TV default settings adding frames to video at 24fps etc. Going to check my TV settings when I get home!

Leave a Comment