Reading Shakespeare While Sitting On a Vibrator has been added as a related post - related requested by gwiz665 on that post.

Oh shit, I forgot about the cyberpuck, which sounds like a robotic Shakespeare character. <- boom goes the dynamite.
And the whole 1280 x 800 smacks of bs to me in the same way Forte's claims of 512x460 did: adding together the per-eye resolution. Granted, they seem to be upfront about the vertical resolution of 800 (which isn't great for 2012 either) but that horizontal res? Boolshit! It might be 1280 for an iguana with eyes on either side of it's head, looking at different shit per eyeball all its life. But for we humans, each eyeball pretty much looks at the same thing, not accounting for parallax of course. So I'd say the actual horizontal resolution might approach 800, depending on how much they want each eye to "share" as it were. So it's essentially a giant square.

Naysaying/partypooping aside, it still looks promising. There's nothing quite like moving your head around to observe a virtual world: it affords the kind of immersion you can't touch with a standard monitor setup, I don't care how big it is. <- that's what she never says. Boom again!

>> ^probie:

>> ^shuac:
Back in '96, I bought a Forte VFX-1 which was a VR headset with stereoscopic vision, very comfy over-the-ear headphones, and motion tracking. All for about $1000.
Each eyeball had it's own little LCD screen (263x230) and I can tell you that it looked like pure ass. Despite it's shortcomings, I played the original System Shock with it and I still have very fond memories of skulking through Citadel station with that thing strapped to my melon.
While I'm not interested in contributing to a kickstarter campaign (after all, that's why we have venture capitalists), I may be interested in a finished retail product.

Ha! I, too, bought a VFX-1 headset. (Had to buy a separate Number Nine S3 Virge card as well so the interface cable would work). I never did play SS1 on it, but I did roll through Quake 1 and all of it's mission packs, as well as used it for Looking Glass' Flight Unlimited. I never used the Cyberpuck controller, as it wasn't very intuitive to me. Once GLQuake came out (which had to run at nothing less than 512x384) that was the final nail in the coffin. But fun times while it lasted.

I think when Shakespeare wrote, "Brevity is the soul of wit," what he really meant was, "The Young Turks can suck the humor out of anything."

>> ^Bruti79:

>> ^shinyblurry:
It's not three different Gods..it's three persons, one God. There is only one God, and that
God is three persons. How can God be three persons at the same time? Perhaps because He is
hyper-dimensional, although I don't think that would be an adequate description in reality. I think though that the concept itself illuminates the potential differences between His existence and ours.

How can god be a person and a god at the same time? How does a person exist as a god and a human at the same time? Removing the possibility of god being three identical clones and using your model. Logic and physics state that:
1)God is three persons
2)These three people are god
3)They are not duplicates of each other
4)Therefore: There are three separate gods
This all would have been summed up better had someone used better grammar.


Here is a dictionary definition of person

per·son (pûrsn)
n.
1. A living human. Often used in combination: chairperson; spokesperson; salesperson.
2. An individual of specified character: a person of importance.
3. The composite of characteristics that make up an individual personality; the self.
4. The living body of a human: searched the prisoner's person.
5. Physique and general appearance.
6. Law A human or organization with legal rights and duties.
7. Christianity Any of the three separate individualities of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, as distinguished from the essence of the Godhead that unites them.
8. Grammar
a. Any of three groups of pronoun forms with corresponding verb inflections that distinguish the speaker (first person), the individual addressed (second person), and the individual or thing spoken of (third person).
b. Any of the different forms or inflections expressing these distinctions.
9. A character or role, as in a play; a guise: "Well, in her person, I say I will not have you" (Shakespeare).

As you can see, Christianity has its own definition. It is referring to, essentially, that everyone in the Godhead shares the same nature or essence, but that they have their own individual personalities. The Father is not the Son and the Son is not the Father but they are both equally God in nature. Not separate Gods, but one God made of three persons. Just like a human father and son are both equally human because they both share that human nature.

I still think monkeys banging away on typewriters will reach Shakespeare faster than these two will.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'human, genetics, relationship, grandparents, shakespear, buddah' to 'human, genetics, relationship, grandparents, shakespeare, buddah' - edited by hpqp

Ha! I was there at Shakespeare and Co. when they were filming this. I live down the street.

I'm very happy you liked it. I almost deleted that post because I was afraid the whole thing was too pompous. But I figured, ultimately, who could argue with the sentiment..."Garfield" really was a horrible film.


In reply to this comment by ChaosEngine:
In reply to this comment by TheFreak:
Put a thousand fruit flies in a box and you can watch the entire circle of life, played out in multiple generations, in a matter of days.
Now, stand back far enough to view the entirety of human existence in one box and the objective eye will discern no greater purpose than the fruit fly. We live, we reproduce, we die. All of human evolution and technical advancement bent to the simple purpose of continuing to exist.

We are ultimately seperated from the fruit fly by one thing; a simple question,
"Why?"

The contemplation of our own mortality is undoubtedly the single factor that has inspired us to become more than the sum of our individual lives. The yearning to outlive ourselves, to defy the inherent pointlessness of existence, to deny the emptiness of the void that precedes us and remains, undisturbed, after we're gone. The human defiance of the finity and futility of life drives the greatest achievements of our species.

Humanity, alone among the animals of the earth, has taken the gifts of evolution and harnessed them to scream its answer to the empty cosmos with soul wrenching achievements of art and philosophy. Those creations of mankind that we experience as a feeling, rising up from inside us and overwhelming our minds with a beauty and perfection far greater than ourselves.

The great accomplishments of mankind that elevate the purpose of our existence:
The philosophy of Aristotle
The architecture of Angkor Wat and St. Peter's Basilica
The art and discovery of Leonardo Da Vinci
The grandeur of the Sistine Chapel and the humble beauty of Van Gogh
The feets of engineering; the great wall of china and Apollo moon landing
All the great works of the most inspired among us, who could encapsulate beauty, wonder, humor and tragedy into discrete works of brilliance:

Shakespeare, Sophocles, Mark Twain, Hemingway, Kepler, Gödel, Newton, Hippocrates, Bach, Wagner, Coltrane, Hume, Kant, Descartes, Tesla, Gutenberg, Frank Lloyd Wright...
...and Bill Murray.

Except for his work on Garfield.
That movie was fucking horrible.


My life is better for having read that comment.

In reply to this comment by TheFreak:
Put a thousand fruit flies in a box and you can watch the entire circle of life, played out in multiple generations, in a matter of days.
Now, stand back far enough to view the entirety of human existence in one box and the objective eye will discern no greater purpose than the fruit fly. We live, we reproduce, we die. All of human evolution and technical advancement bent to the simple purpose of continuing to exist.

We are ultimately seperated from the fruit fly by one thing; a simple question,
"Why?"

The contemplation of our own mortality is undoubtedly the single factor that has inspired us to become more than the sum of our individual lives. The yearning to outlive ourselves, to defy the inherent pointlessness of existence, to deny the emptiness of the void that precedes us and remains, undisturbed, after we're gone. The human defiance of the finity and futility of life drives the greatest achievements of our species.

Humanity, alone among the animals of the earth, has taken the gifts of evolution and harnessed them to scream its answer to the empty cosmos with soul wrenching achievements of art and philosophy. Those creations of mankind that we experience as a feeling, rising up from inside us and overwhelming our minds with a beauty and perfection far greater than ourselves.

The great accomplishments of mankind that elevate the purpose of our existence:
The philosophy of Aristotle
The architecture of Angkor Wat and St. Peter's Basilica
The art and discovery of Leonardo Da Vinci
The grandeur of the Sistine Chapel and the humble beauty of Van Gogh
The feets of engineering; the great wall of china and Apollo moon landing
All the great works of the most inspired among us, who could encapsulate beauty, wonder, humor and tragedy into discrete works of brilliance:

Shakespeare, Sophocles, Mark Twain, Hemingway, Kepler, Gödel, Newton, Hippocrates, Bach, Wagner, Coltrane, Hume, Kant, Descartes, Tesla, Gutenberg, Frank Lloyd Wright...
...and Bill Murray.

Except for his work on Garfield.
That movie was fucking horrible.


My life is better for having read that comment.

Put a thousand fruit flies in a box and you can watch the entire circle of life, played out in multiple generations, in a matter of days.
Now, stand back far enough to view the entirety of human existence in one box and the objective eye will discern no greater purpose than the fruit fly. We live, we reproduce, we die. All of human evolution and technical advancement bent to the simple purpose of continuing to exist.

We are ultimately seperated from the fruit fly by one thing; a simple question,
"Why?"

The contemplation of our own mortality is undoubtedly the single factor that has inspired us to become more than the sum of our individual lives. The yearning to outlive ourselves, to defy the inherent pointlessness of existence, to deny the emptiness of the void that precedes us and remains, undisturbed, after we're gone. The human defiance of the finity and futility of life drives the greatest achievements of our species.

Humanity, alone among the animals of the earth, has taken the gifts of evolution and harnessed them to scream its answer to the empty cosmos with soul wrenching achievements of art and philosophy. Those creations of mankind that we experience as a feeling, rising up from inside us and overwhelming our minds with a beauty and perfection far greater than ourselves.

The great accomplishments of mankind that elevate the purpose of our existence:
The philosophy of Aristotle
The architecture of Angkor Wat and St. Peter's Basilica
The art and discovery of Leonardo Da Vinci
The grandeur of the Sistine Chapel and the humble beauty of Van Gogh
The feets of engineering; the great wall of china and Apollo moon landing
All the great works of the most inspired among us, who could encapsulate beauty, wonder, humor and tragedy into discrete works of brilliance:

Shakespeare, Sophocles, Mark Twain, Hemingway, Kepler, Gödel, Newton, Hippocrates, Bach, Wagner, Coltrane, Hume, Kant, Descartes, Tesla, Gutenberg, Frank Lloyd Wright...
...and Bill Murray.

Except for his work on Garfield.
That movie was fucking horrible.

British Lawnmower Museum
www.lawnmowerworld.co.uk/
106-114 Shakespeare Street Southport, Merseyside
PR8 5AJ, United Kingdom 01704 501 336

Hmm. I'm an atheist, but I kinda disagree with them on this one.

It is an elective course. Don't like it, don't take it -- just like they said. And yes, I would say the same thing if it was an elective course about the Quran or Sharia law.

I took an elective "World Religions" class in my public High School. It was very cool -- we talked about comparative numbers of adherents of various religions and non-religious people, regional and national religious trends, religious shifts over time and what caused them, etc. etc. This was in Kansas, so it could easily have been some conservative Christian right-wing nut just trying to push an agenda, but it wasn't. In my opinion, it was interesting and objective.

However, even if it wasn't, it still would have been an elective class. Hell, even in required classes, I had people pushing subjective opinions down my throat as though they were facts. "Shakespeare was the greatest Western writer in history." The best thing that I learned from classes like that was that sometimes opinions differ, and that is OK -- don't let anyone ever tell you otherwise.

>> ^shole:

I'll never understand the appeal of these videos.
Patience does not equal skill.
If they did it in one go I'd be properly impressed, but the works of Shakespeare can be produced by a monkey on a keyboard given enough time.
I'm impressed that they didn't get kicked out for messing around in the hall.


Your point about Shakespearean monkeys works against your 'not impressive' conclusion imo, namely due to it potentially taking billions of trillions of years to achieve this goal, to which most monkeys and experiment evaluators do not have thus any short cuts are beneficial.

Specific reason being that because they put in the time and effort to achieve these mostly useless skills and video tape said skills, i now have a realistic idea of what the result would have been had i wasted my time on this task. So I'm impressed by my having gained the knowledge of the result of such endeavors without spending the much larger amount of time that is otherwise required, compared to just over 3 mins. Given a roughly estimated 80 years of life each if we're lucky, i think a few seconds of being impressed with their efforts is a reasonable position to take.

2:48 I liked that one

I'll never understand the appeal of these videos.
Patience does not equal skill.
If they did it in one go I'd be properly impressed, but the works of Shakespeare can be produced by a monkey on a keyboard given enough time.
I'm impressed that they didn't get kicked out for messing around in the hall.

Thanks!
In reply to this comment by blutruth:
*quality!