Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
 Share
davieG

Technology, Science and the Environment.

By davieG, in General Chat

Recommended Posts

The Bear

The Bear

Posted
Posted
On 20/01/2020 at 12:49, leicsmac said:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-51171491

 

....does anyone else see a damn problem with Western countries sending their plastic waste to Asia on the sly and expecting them to dump it there?

 

17 hours ago, leicsmac said:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-51171491

 

This could have some real effect if it goes ahead as envisioned.

 

Worth posting twice! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SpacedX

SpacedX

Posted
Posted
On 22/01/2020 at 01:11, leicsmac said:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-51185836

 

Somewhat concerning as there are now cases in quite a few other places too, but it's good to see that the Chinese government have learned from their mistake on SARS and are aiming for full transparency here.

Trade repercussions. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pliskin

Pliskin

Posted
Posted

Off topic slightly.... but smart watches = potential life savers. The father in law who is a generally healthy chap, has been wearing his smart watch for a few years, and recently noticed his heart rate going through the roof, from about 60bpm resting to nearly 180bpm resting.... at first he thought it maybe the watch however I wore it for a days and it was fine. Got himself to the doctors and it appeared he developed a heart defect, it just began beating irregularly. 
 

Cut a long story short he had zero symptoms and was planning on going to Australia and was told had he done so there was 90% chance he would have had a stroke mid air. 
 

Amazing really when you think about it, his watch has potentially saved his life. 
 

Just thought I’d share as it’s useful to know they have this ability, I’ve got one for my dad now because he’s a fatso who doesn’t exercise!  

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Bear

The Bear

Posted
Posted (edited)

You can do it with photos as well. There's some software called "Topaz Denoise" that I have that will "upscale" them and smooth them out. It's pretty damn good. You have to pay after the trial period though. 

 

Apparently you can use it with video pretty similar to what you posted, but you need something that will strip every frame of the video as a separate photo and then recompile them all after being upscaled. No idea if that's what's being done in your link but there's a website that will do it for you on any video clip for a fee.

Edited by The Bear
Link to comment
Share on other sites
leicsmac

leicsmac

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, The Bear said:

You can do it with photos as well. There's some software called "Topaz Denoise" that I have that will "upscale" them and smooth them out. It's pretty damn good. You have to pay after the trial period though. 

 

Apparently you can use it with video pretty similar to what you posted, but you need something that will strip every frame of the video as a separate photo and then recompile them all after being upscaled. No idea if that's what's being done in your link but there's a website that will do it for you on any video clip for a fee.

From what I can tell that is what is happening here, only they're using a neural network to do the stripping and processing, which seems to be both faster and with better clarity of result than a human doing it step by step.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
WigstonWanderer

WigstonWanderer

Posted
Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, leicsmac said:

https://gizmodo.com/neural-networks-upscale-film-from-1896-to-4k-make-it-l-1841449875

 

This is remarkable stuff.

If you want to see what can be done, watch “They Shall Not Grow Old”. They restored film from the First World War. Quite incredible. Not sure if it uses neural networks or not.

Edited by WigstonWanderer
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
SpacedX

SpacedX

Posted
Posted

So 'Mad' Mike Hughes has finally departed his 'flat earth' for good.

 

His previous ascent in a steam powered rocket ended with a back injury, yesterday's ended his life. 

 

 

He aimed to prove to himself and the world that the earth was a flat disc by ultimately launching himself above the Kármán line in his homemade steam powered rocket, however since this is approximately 327,360 in altitude and his previous attempt saw him ascend to 1,875 feet it's not clear how long this would have taken to achieve. I believe I'm right in saying that he intended to launch from a balloon at around 100,000 feet - where the remaining 200,000 odd feet would have come from is anyone's guess. 

 

He didn't prove the earth was flat, but definitely confirmed it's solid. It turns out, his theory on gravity was just as shitty as his parachute deployment mechanism. Physics - 1 Tin foil - 0. He certainly understood it in the end.

 

Seriously, RIP Mike Hughes. It may look like an episode of a Wyle E Coyote/Roadrunner cartoon, but you can't dispute the bravery and resolve of the man. Yes flat Earth is ludicrous, but no one wants to see someone killed trying to prove it. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
leicsmac

leicsmac

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Line-X said:

So 'Mad' Mike Hughes has finally departed his 'flat earth' for good.

 

His previous ascent in a steam powered rocket ended with a back injury, yesterday's ended his life. 

 

 

He aimed to prove to himself and the world that the earth was a flat disc by ultimately launching himself above the Kármán line in his homemade steam powered rocket, however since this is approximately 327,360 in altitude and his previous attempt saw him ascend to 1,875 feet it's not clear how long this would have taken to achieve. I believe I'm right in saying that he intended to launch from a balloon at around 100,000 feet - where the remaining 200,000 odd feet would have come from is anyone's guess. 

 

He didn't prove the earth was flat, but definitely confirmed it's solid. It turns out, his theory on gravity was just as shitty as his parachute deployment mechanism. Physics - 1 Tin foil - 0. He certainly understood it in the end.

 

Seriously, RIP Mike Hughes. It may look like an episode of a Wyle E Coyote/Roadrunner cartoon, but you can't dispute the bravery and resolve of the man. Yes flat Earth is ludicrous, but no one wants to see someone killed trying to prove it. 

 

It's a shame, really, would have preferred him to make it up so far that it was clear he was totally wrong about what he believed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SpacedX

SpacedX

Posted
Posted
18 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

It's a shame, really, would have preferred him to make it up so far that it was clear he was totally wrong about what he believed.

In a homemade steam powered rocket Mac? With a wide field of vision he could have detected it from hiring a Lear jet at no risk to himself or anyone else, but these people are completely in denial of reality and utterly incapable of challenging their preconceptions. Hypothetically, even if he'd been subsidised/funded to be sent into orbit by a Soyuz rocket bound for the ISS he'd allege some trickery. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
leicsmac

leicsmac

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Line-X said:

In a homemade steam powered rocket Mac? With a wide field of vision he could have detected it from hiring a Lear jet at no risk to himself or anyone else, but these people are completely in denial of reality and utterly incapable of challenging their preconceptions. Hypothetically, even if he'd been subsidised/funded to be sent into orbit by a Soyuz rocket bound for the ISS he'd allege some trickery. 

Oh yeah, I know it's wishful thinking, but as you said, no one wanted to see him dead for the sake of his ignorance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
leicsmac

leicsmac

Posted
Posted

A thought occurs to me:

 

As much as it is needed to convince certain parts of the world that climate change is in fact a real problem...what happens when that is successful (either by successful persuasion or by the Earth making it blatantly clear)? How long before the first set of power cuts in poor neighbourhoods at scheduled times, or personal transportation cut off to all but the wealthy and public transportation still wildly unfit for purpose?

 

Because you can bet if the people who deny the effects of climate change right now because it doesn't affect them personally have control over the response when they deny it no longer, that response will certainly not be even-handed.

 

Might make one long for the days where they simply denied it all.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
MC Prussian

MC Prussian

Posted
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, leicsmac said:

A thought occurs to me:

 

As much as it is needed to convince certain parts of the world that climate change is in fact a real problem...what happens when that is successful (either by successful persuasion or by the Earth making it blatantly clear)? How long before the first set of power cuts in poor neighbourhoods at scheduled times, or personal transportation cut off to all but the wealthy and public transportation still wildly unfit for purpose?

 

Because you can bet if the people who deny the effects of climate change right now because it doesn't affect them personally have control over the response when they deny it no longer, that response will certainly not be even-handed.

 

Might make one long for the days where they simply denied it all.

Global population is about to decline by 2050, so each individual will have a lower impact in terms of ecological footprint, we'll have advanced in technology by then, use more solar and hydro power, drive and fly cleaner, live in smarter, more energy-efficient houses and eat more wholesomely.

And maybe the fuel cell has made a breakthrough also.

 

There, saved you the hassle.

 

If you want to combat Climate Change, I suggest you read up on Don Quixote.

Edited by MC Prussian
Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Bear

The Bear

Posted
Posted (edited)

Why is the population set to decline in 2050?

 

Given how fast it grows I've often thought that developed countries should try and limit family sizes by restricting benefits once a certain size is reached (e.g no more money after  two kids. You want more then pay for them yourselves). Of course I may be coming across as stupendously ignorant there, but it seems a logical way of doing things rather than the "you're not allowed kids" method in say, China. 

Edited by The Bear
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...