search results matching tag: Shade

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (165)     Sift Talk (9)     Blogs (14)     Comments (535)   

Your Brain On Shrooms

BoneRemake says...

Oh that sucks.. I do them once a year at least for the therapeutic effect. It is never just things moving around and funny shades of light for me.

nanrod said:

All they've ever done for me is make the walls look like they're breathing and make the lighting brighten and dim spontaneously. so for me kind of a waste of time and they taste like shit.

Red Neck trucker says NO to this blonde trying to merge...

Sagemind says...

I think the differences in the way we see things are, I see the grey areas, and you see in black and white. Once someone is guilty in your eyes you come down 100% on them.
Me seeing the shades isn't always better, as I give everyone the benefit of doubt, sometimes when they don't deserve it, but I give it to them till I'm proven wrong.
That's maybe why you're better suited for your career, and I'm not.
Being able to make a solid judgement call and sticking with it is a solid attribute.

I only suggest that you see the possibility that sometimes honest people make poor judgement calls.
Where you see someone purposely ramming a truck, I see someone who made a poor decision in switching lanes and then proceeds to think she's good to go, and maybe is concentrating to much on the truck ahead and not seeing the truck beside her.
Poor driving, absolutely, but I can't believe her judgement said purposely hit the truck.

On the flip side. The truck driver is driving well within his limits, and maybe is tired of people cutting him off. So this time he doesn't let her in, not expecting that she may not notice him closing her out.

He could have avoided the collision, or at least tried, as he saw it coming and made no effort. She didn't. I don't dispute her bad driving decision or skill in this matter. On the flip side, his driving choices are not any better.

Have a great day. Keep on keeping on

Lawdeedaw said:

Actually, my mind is very easy to change. From being homophobic, to hating certain skin colors, I realize how stupid I was growing up as a person and how I had to unteach myself a lot of things.

As for my post; judgment is one thing. I do judge the car driver (And I judge the truck driver, although much less...) When that car intentionally rammed the truck it put not only their own lives in danger but other lives as well. That sort of accident can cause major destruction when 10 more are added to the equation.

I am glad neither the car's driver nor the truck driver were truly hurt. I am glad that people in our country only need to pay higher premiums in situations like this. That is a good thing and justice isn't wanting them dead...

If you are talking about my hatred for major corporations, then not sure where I shouldn't judge. Major for-profit healthcare providers, evil, evil. Same with car/personal injury-healthcare providers.

What colors do YOU see?

newtboy says...

It always looked clearly black and blue to me, no matter which screen I see it on. How could that color be white?
I don't get the explanation. It seemed he was saying some people think if there's a blue sky or surroundings, that anything white will reflect that and look blue?! WHAT? I've never once thought a white T shirt looked blue outside or in a blue room. That sounds crazy to me. I note that another clear shot of it at the end was just as close up and with nothing to compare the colors to, but is obviously black and blue. Doesn't that blow their explanation right there?
EDIT: Also, there is white right next to the dress in multiple places. Can people really not see a difference between the dress and the white wall/window?

Also, looking closely in the cube example, the lower brown square IS slightly lighter in color than the top one, even when they remove all other squares. Also, they DID cheat, just look at the edges of the squares (when in the cube). They are also shaded to darken the upper square and lighten the lower one. They remove the edges when they show just the two squares, actually changing the overall colors. That's totally cheating....so they're totally liars! ;-)

Octopus Jumps Out Of Water And Attacks Crab

If Asian Women Hit On White Guys the Way White Guys Hit On..

Lilithia (Member Profile)

Zifnab (Member Profile)

10328x7760 - A 10K Timelapse Demo

NirnRoot says...

Cree-eepy. I pulled my shades after watching this video.

I mean, this technology has existed for decades but only in the hands of governments; while no more trustworthy than anyone else, its limited availability meant the ordinary citizen was unable to be the target of close surveillanec. Now it's available to any consumer with a few kilobux to waste. In a decade or so we'll probably see this sort of resolution on our smartphones.

Privacy really is dead.

PETRA:People for the Ethical Treatment of Robotic Animals

SFOGuy (Member Profile)

The Fine Tuning of the Universe

deathcow says...

Asking the human race to answer questions like this right now is like asking a 2 year old what shade of red something is.

We're learning plenty but perhaps not ready to definitively answer any of the biggest questions. I'm certainly not buying into their opinions from a video like this. This video started to reek pretty quick.

10 Hours of Walking in NYC as a Woman

bmacs27 says...

You use that word deserve. Why? Nobody is saying that. Shit happens to everybody, deserving or not. Our point is that this isn't a big fucking deal. It's just part of the shit people put up with living in a society. While qualifying it as "not as bad" you still compare it to rape. That's dumb.

The fact is she probably has it easier than every cat caller in the video. Thin, cis, rich, white woman problems don't rate. Sorry.

My concern about this video comes from a broader context. I'm a shade left of Mao, so I'm poorly represented in politics. Still, I would rather see the dems take the next two cycles. This video is embedded in a context of watching the left overplay their perceived (and previously realized) advantage with women voters. It's a transparent attempt to build momentum for Clinton 2016. People are sick of it. Polls suggest the strategy will cost them dearly in November.

ChaosEngine said:

I give up.

You're all correct.

All these comments were completely innocent and she deserved it by daring to walk down the street without wearing earbuds or screaming fuck off at everyone. This video is just a cynical example of subjecting yourself to 10 hours of abuse just so you can portray poor, black or latino men in a racist light.

Did I miss anything?

Oh yeah, and it's somehow the governments fault!

Whiter Shade of Pale - Procol Harum

Trout says...

Ah, one of the all-time great singles of the rock era. So mature, yet it was their first single. I envy those hearing this for the first time (and they're just kids in this video... kids!). One of Paul McCartney's favorite songs:

McCartney: "It's got to be "A Whiter Shade of Pale." The first time I ever heard it was the night I met Linda. We met at the Bag O' Nails, and we went on to the Speakeasy, and they played the record of it there. We were with Keith Moon of the Who and Eric Burdon of the Animals, and we were all trying to figure out who it was. We all thought it must be Stevie Winwood, but it turned out to be Procol Harum. We just said, 'This is the best song ever, man.'"

Road rage encounter doesn't go as planned

3D Object Manipulation from a Single Photo

billpayer says...

Dude, you still didn't watch the indepth video. Please do a tiny bit of research before you post.

They explain the model is stock. They explain how the app helps distort the model to fit the plate. They explain how they app figures out the texture blind spots. They explain how it mirrors existing textures to fill the spot. They explain how is figures out the perspective of the plate. They explain how it then matches the lighting and shading of the original.

bcglorf said:

I'm a Comp Sci grad who spent a great deal of time doing 3D coding so yes, I've got some idea what is involved here.

Best case scenario here is you have to track down an existing 3-D model that matches the object you want to manipulate close enough to do well. You also need that model's texturing to match close enough to look good. They don't clearly show how you map that model to a portion of your 2d image, but if they have made that relatively simple it is the 'big deal' portion they are showing off because that is very hard, and most likely has some finicky bits to it.

Also, the first bit of finding a good matching 3-d model is the killer. Armed with a well matched 3-D model, something like Blender already let you do this relatively easily. Finding that model is the hard part and for anything living it's simply not going to exist in 90% of cases, so your gonna just not do it, or do what the movie guys are already doing and build your own model.

I'm not saying there's not good work here, but I am sceptical of the fact that the real nuts and bolts of what would make this a 'big deal'(the UI mapping) isn't being shown. Furthermore, the animated origami clinches my skepticism. Sorry, but 3-D animation of 'some object' in your 2d image has NOT been made easy or IMHO been changed at all by their product. 100% of the effort there is the 3-D animation of the object, which you still have to get somebody to do artistically, full stop.



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon