2 things of note about these low powered demos. First, there isn't alot of polygons being pushed. The chair (which clearly dropped below 30fps) was the highest poly, the trees seemed to lack realistic lighting as pet the 3rd video. They wernt BAD but they were no crysis. Also I am in no way saying great trees can't be done in unreal 4. Second as mentioned above, very static scenes that are very self contained. Todays games are all about open worlds and dynamic events.

They're pretty awesome, but keep in mind they are static scenes with nothing else to tax the CPU like character movements, fight mechanics, NPCs, moveable objects, etc.. Add in all the things that make a game, not just a pretty picture/scene, and even a powerful computer is going to have serious problems keeping up at this quality. I expect this to be the best they can do for now when you make it a game and not just a scene.....
*related=http://videosift.com/video/Snowdrop-Next-Gen-Engine-Tom-Clancys-The-Division

My guess with the phone one is that flipping along the face increases the instability due to the components inside the phone. The other axis are more evenly laid out. Across the face of the phone you have the battery off center, cpu etc all unevenly laid out, so the rotation as it flips becomes more unstable with each spin.

Water one has me stumped... Then again I've never full understood static electricity.

One of the companies I worked for, their whole advertising gimmick was basically Native Advertising. The ads were formatted to look like that publication's news stories. There was a small banner at the top that said "Paid advertisement" but if you missed that, the rest of the ad read like a newspaper or magazine entry. Complete with interviews with people in the company or former government officials and the like. There would be of course a special offer for the readers of this paper at the end, making it seem far more personalized than it was. One felt a bit dirty sending things to the people who were duped into paying $20 for a State $2 bill that had a static sticker over it to make it look like it was some sort of official thing, and of course that was a subscription, so they'd get taken to the cleaner many more times...

He's not trying to lanesplit the trucks, he's panic braking because they have stopped and he was going too fast/noticed too late. He goes between them because there is no where else to go if you see what I mean.

It wasn't lane splitting that caused the problem it was noticing static traffic ahead too late (maybe going to fast to boot). Arguably all his fault anyway, but dual carriageways can catch you out like that sometimes (only takes a moment) and bike brakes are kind of shitbox.

Seems like another non-issue. In other words, people who stream video should pay for it, and not the people who don't. Right now, people who don't are subsidizing some of the costs for those who do. I don't really get the "problem," but I haven't put a lot of time looking into it.

In other words, what's the issue with NN? That they won't let you access porn sites or whatever? I think freeing it up for ISP competition would take care of access and cost issues. Like if Verizon was to introduce "static" onto your calls, then AT&T would take a larger chunk from them by not doing so. In a free market, businesses have to compete for your business. In a free market, you cannot really introduce a false scarcity. Only if there is a cartel or monopoly can that happen (which, in this case -- and in every case -- is ultimately the government).

In a competitive environment, no sane provider would want a reputation as a bad provider who intentionally messes with their own quality of service. That makes no sense. The restriction of ISP competition seems to be more of a problem and it is for this reason that the whole NN issue strikes me as another unnecessary freakout.

Interestingly, in this video at least, he was firing a .22lr Ruger MkII, about as low powered a pistol as you can get. .22lr has a hard time going through inch thick plywood (when fired from a pistol). This is different than the alleged .357 magnum, .38 special, and .380 ACP the random lady was calling out.

The gun range guy is incorrect. Some people always get on target with static shooting. Those destroyed walls in his range will (in my experience) be from beginners. Even then, there are degrees of off target. You can miss significantly to the sides of most targets and still safely hit the backstop. You have to be shooting incredibly wide or high to miss the backstop.

Noise is a big issue here. Suppressors are legal in Florida with the right permit - he should get them for all his firearms.

Safety is an issue as well, if the entire wall area he firing into is not thick enough to stop his strongest firearm then there is serious risk of injuring someone else. He should build a mini steel and concrete reinforced range.

Fuel tanks don't automatically explode. MythBusters did this in two episodes, and you need a tracer round fired from a long distance to ignite a tank's fuel.

Regardless of the legalities or not, if his neighbours are scared and annoyed, (and regardless of whether or not it is a rational fear), he should be considerate of his neighbours and their concerns and do more to alleviate their concerns.

Oh, then you do believe in AGW? If not, what's the straw man?
If global warming were the reason I do the things I do, you would be correct, going vegetarian would be a reasonable next step. The thing is I've done all I have done for personal, self centered reasons that benefit me personally, it just so happens that they mostly also benefit the planet. Because I intentionally didn't have children and don't believe in reincarnation, I have little incentive to attempt to save the planet beyond my lifespan. That said, I eat little beef, which is the worst meat to eat, and mostly chicken, the best meat for ecology (except for Iguana tail, a truly sustainable meat product).
CO2 staying at current levels dooms the planet fairly quickly. Raising those levels dooms if faster and more completely. I see little chance that we might actually decrease CO2 production levels, much less turn it to a negative number, which needs to happen if there's any chance in hell of stopping the run-away greenhouse effect. I see it as an issue that's far too late to stop, and can only be minimized at best, and will likely be maximized instead.
It's more like 4 billion that need to reduce their 'footprint', and another 3-4 billion that need to not expand theirs. More to the point, it's about 5 billion that need to not reproduce, while the other 3 billion only have 2 children at most. Not a likely outcome, but what is needed to solve the most pressing issues of the day.
Government is required to incentivize industry to follow suit and reduce their emissions. Without coersion, they'll do what's cheaper every time, and not cleaning up your own mess is always cheaper.
The only 'climate scientists' that are skeptical are the deniers, all others have examined the data and come to the same conclusion, just differing in the levels of change they expect. From what I see, they all underestimate the changes to come and ignore compounding features of the systems.
I'm not sure why you don't see this as a serious conversation, but that's on you.
I have given a scientific commentary. you ignored it and asked the same questions again, claiming they had been ignored. I'll try again....

CO2 saturation and temperature are linked, and have been proven to be so. Human production of CO2 is larger and faster than any natural CO2 rise in known climate history, well over 200000 years and up to hundreds of millions of years depending on what data you consider reasonable and reliable, and it's not only the amount but the rate of change that is greater than any natural climate change ever seen in the data. It's that faster rate of change that's the most dangerous, but the amount that determines the change to come. The system is slow to react, and is only now reacting to last centuries atmospheric changes. That means that even if we stopped CO2 production completely today, the effects will still be felt for centuries to come, and we aren't even slowing the rate at which we raise the amount of CO2 we produce, it's going up faster by the day thanks to those that either deny the problem or ignore it in favor of profit or simplicity. That's why estimates of the future are all lacking in my eyes, they all assume either static or reduced CO2 production, which is not reality.
We're hosed. The only option I see is to become self sufficient and die before the planet does. One more reason to not have children and instead be self sufficient as much as possible and enjoy what's left while you can.

One thing this video (and every other pro-net neutrality video ignores) is that there are valid technical reasons to have some content faster than others. In an ideal world, we should be able to mark some content as more or less latency tolerant.

Static webpages for instance; if your online banking or facebook or even videosift takes half a second longer to load, no-one really cares. But if your video stops for a second or an online game lags, that can ruin the experience.

Right now, if two servers send two packets, they are treated the same, even if one is time dependant (video/game content) and one isn't (static text).

That is the core argument against net neutrality. The problem is that it should be the content providers who decide what data is time dependant, not ISPs. Ideally, ISPs shouldn't even know what content is going through their pipes.

Just in case it's not clear, I do not in any way support the idea that ISPs should be allowed to slow or speed up content on their networks, any more than a construction company should be allowed tell drivers who drives in what lane.

Waaaay better than Cracklemore-That wanna-be gangster schtick is a one-hit-wonder fart in the wind compared this cat's video. Personally love his humping the static television and blowing his gf's clothes off with the pelvic thrust.

Inspired shit Maynard

Comedy timing > Arbitrary contemporisation


The moment of static (esp the hiss sound) creates a naturalistic feeling pause/reset between each unrelated snippet of humour. A "comedy beat" if you will.

If this video was edited with the smooth silent transition one gets with modern digital broadcast it would detract significantly from the overall effect i.e. beat, reset, beat, reset, beat etc.....

Analogue static does this job beautifully and despite being dated is still almost universally understood/recognised by viewers. Perhaps another less anachronistic technique might have worked (with "boop" noises or something) but the fact remains that this whole static thing does the job wonderfully (for most of us anyway).

It's not "dumbass" when it works this well and the last 70-80 years of visual media didn't just disappear from the cultural memory when digital came along.

If you think you can do better then be my guest, maybe you might find a way that's even funnier and changes peoples attitude. Until then the artistic choices of others stand on their own merits and personally I can't think of an editing technique that would fit this style of vid better.


In summary, it's comedy not a documentary and out of place anachronism is a well practised and successful comedy technique (i.e. the very fact its so out of place is part of the reason its so funny). Why does that bother you so much???

Semi off-topic but the title "NES Zapper" reminds me of the NES Advantage my little brother had. For those that don't know, it was this controller that was meant to be like a real arcade-style controller with enlarged buttons & a true post and knob joystick. It had a big base that you could set down on a coffee table or in your lap. Here's what they look like.

My brother had it in his lap, probably playing Metroid or something, and being that it was wintertime, and prime scuff-your-socks-on-the-carpet-and-static-shock-your-little-brother-season, I scuffed my socks on the carpet and touched his hand as he played. What instantly followed was like a super-powered shock that I felt as much as he did (well, not quite as much...) It turns out that the NES Advantage had a metal base, and when I shocked his hand, it fried the controller(on his lap) and it basically electrocuted his wang. He screamed like a a little girl so I was, as you can imagine, completely thrilled with the results. Unfortunately my parents didn't see things my way and they made me buy another controller. It was so worth it though.

On the subject of game covers, it seemed regions made a difference sometimes. My favourite example is the RE4 cover. They came up with a gorgeous, subtle and somewhat creepy cover for PAL regions but NTSC it's covered in Man! Enemies! Guns! IN YO FACE! like they think their audiences are retarded.

Compare this disgusting NTSC cover:
http://static.giantbomb.com/uploads/original/0/8111/1246418-1109666475_00.jpg

with this awesome PAL cover:
http://static.giantbomb.com/uploads/original/0/8111/1246420-resident_evil4_ngc_cover.jpg


Great video, btw...

*isdupe, preserve them all in static wonder-

There used to be a magician at Knott's Berry Farm that demonstrated this trick pretty close to the audience and then explained that he had trained for years to create the pathway through his body for the sword to pass through.

The arm is particularly easy because of how the muscles are arranged around the bone. It passes right below the biceps. Not much going on in this particular, dare I say "easy" to pull off location of bloodless stabbiness.
I don't know if the Knott's magician is still there or not, but it was a "magic" show that explained the science behind older, more simplistic tricks like this.

Also included were lots of different types of electricity stunts (static electricity, powering light bulbs through people, etc.), which have fallen to the wayside with magicians because most people nowadays understand electricity and it's not as gut wrenching as this scar tissue build up dealio.

I upvoted for Ricky's reactions and David'd ridiculous goading, but the trick itself is le sigh.

The magician at Knott's had a fairly visible scar on both sides of his arm, as he likely performed the trick A LOT. Serious needle mark action. lol. Blaine probably rarely performs this trick and perhaps used other material, like make up, latex or some such material, glue, creams, etc.