I have to agree, the visual representation seemed…off.

I was more interested in what the child indicated with the mixing board, that sounds (and sights I assume) are not filtered to highlight your focus, in fact sometimes the object of focus is somewhat filtered while ambient noises aren’t.

I often think of myself as partially deaf because I can’t seem to focus on voices no matter how much I try, but I often hear tiny noises others can’t until I point them out. I don’t think it’s an ear problem.

walls keep closing in giggitty giggitty. would pay good money to see bobs grief-stricken face. visual representation to the left tho-

240 what? Pixels slope?
235 what? Elephant ball hairs run?
46 right angle what? 46 mouse penises rise?

No it isn't calculus, it's barely trig, and fuck you, my math is spot on...and they're WAY closer.

It's measurements we disagree on....yours suck donkey balls. You claim the stage floor is 4.5' high and the ramp run only 23.5' long....neither is close to right.

I estimated rise, 3' based on the width of stripes, and run, 40' based on the length of stage segments. That's 4.3 degrees. Do you disagree with the estimation, gleaned from pictures and video of the whole stage/ramp?
You can only be saying it's a 23.5' run and 4.6' rise, that's insanely off on both counts, but granted does give you the 11degree number.

The stripes are 1.5' high, the top of the ramp floor (and stage height) is two stripes high....stage segments are at least 10' long, the ramp extends well beyond 3 segments as seen in the full descent video. If you need to nitpick, it might be 35', but 11 degrees still puts that stage floor at 6'9". It's not 1/2 that....It's 3'. 3' rise at 11degrees makes the ramp 15' approximately....also clearly not the case.

It's Trump that makes himself look awkward, and his attempted bullshit excuses are just awkward icing on his cake of awkwardness.... it was not in any way a steep ramp.

Lol. Yes, they got it wrong by about 1.3 degrees. They should commit seppuku in contrition....
But you got it around 6.7 degrees wrong, and now are still fighting about it using unassigned units of measurement on values pulled from....measuring an off center picture from breitbart of 1/3 of the ramp on a monitor?!... to do calculations, and are clearly measuring it insanely wrong, or they altered the picture, or both.

Put 40' run and 11 degrees into the calculator, you get 8' rise, 35'run gives 6'9" hight. It even gives you visual representation. Do you honestly think that stage floor is 8' up, or even 6'9"? If so, you are insane and no math, picture, argument, or fact will change your mind, because it's clearly waist high, two stripes, about 3'. If you aren't saying it's at least 6' 9" high, admit you got it wrong at least to yourself, and let's move on.

Seriously, he's taking a shit on "purist liberals"?

Remind me again, who was speaking up loud and clear about the danger of running another corporatist against a right-wing populist? Who was that again? Was it the strategists and consultants of the DNC? Was it all the celebrities who were „with her“?

Or was it maybe those liberal idiots whose candidate is, I don't know, the most popular politician in the country? Sanders gets cheers from Trump voters at townhalls in red states, and you're putting the blame for Trump's election at the feet of purist liberals?

Honestly, mate. You want to know what a neoliberal disaster looks like? Look at at the White House. Neoliberal policies are the breeding ground of right-wing populists. You think someone like Trump gets elected because of his convincing policy proposals? Right-wing populists are the answers to „centrist“ policies that enrich the few at the cost of the many. Everyone knows the effects, from widescale poverty, historic inequality, the opioid epidemic, all the way to the two-tiered justice system with fraudsters and torturers running free while not being able to pay a parking tickets gets you jailed.

Too abstract for you, Bill? Then look at Detroit. Look at Cleveland. Is that enough of a visual representation of what a neoliberal disaster looks like?

In this situation, they decided to run a corporatist, with the message „America is already great“. How was that supposed to resonate with the working stiff, Bill? The people whose despair is the main driver behind the opioid epidemic, as Case-Deaton has shows us in such detail. Who had the glorious idea to run exclusively on identity politics and ignore the economic plight of the lower class?

Was that the purist liberals, Bill?

Did the purist liberals run a campaign whose own people, if „Shattered“ contains any truth at all, described it as nothing short of a disaster? Even Clinton's own people didn't seem to know why she was running, and were toying with the idea of just going with „it's her turn“. Seriously, the way they describe Clinton's paranoia and refusal to interact with her own staff makes it sound like her campaign was not much less of a clusterfuck than Trump's presidency, from an organizing point of view.

But yeah, go ahead and blame the purist liberals. And Comey, while you're at it. And Russia. And Jill Stein. And fake news. And WikiLeaks. And sexism. Anything but the DNC and their corporate candidate.

Let me know when you're done, maybe then we can have a proper post-mortem of how the Democrats managed to lose the White House, Congress, most state legislatures and Governorships. And we'll start from the top, because we have a saying in German: „der Fisch stinkt vom Kopf her“. Maybe you can get an option to vote against Wall Street, against the war on drugs, against big pharma, against the MIC, and against the destruction of our biosphere. Because you sure as hell didn't have one this time.

Edit: Oh boy, wall of text crits for 10k.

His explanation was rather short and somewhat misleading. Maybe they thought a proper explanation would have been too dry or too lengthy to be of any interest for a sufficient number of their viewers.

tl:dr

If all rotor settings are indicated to be correct, a feedback loop within the circuit indicated a subset of correct connections on the plugboard, even if the initially assumed connection turned out to be wrong. It didn't show all connections, but enough to run it through a modified Enigma to determine if it's a false positive or in fact the correct setting. If it was correct, the rest could be done by hand.

----------------------- Long version -----------------------

Apologies in advance. We had to recreate parts of the Bombe as a simulation, but a) it's been a while and b) it was in German. I'll try to explain the concept behind it, hopefully without screwing it up entirely.

The combination of clear message and code snippet (2:25) is called a crib. This can be used to create a graph, wherein letters are the vertices and connections together with their numerical positions are the edges.

For example, at position 1, "A" corresponds to "W". So you'd create an edge between "A" and "W" and mark that edge as "1". At position 4, "B" corresponds to "T", so there's the edge marked as "4". All edges are bidirectional, the transformation at a specific position can go either way.

Once your graph is finished, you check for loops. These are essential. Without loops, you're boned. In this case, one loop can be found at positions 2,3,5 in form of "T->E->Q->T".

Here the Bombe comes into play. It uses scramblers, each combining all three rotors plus reflector of an enigma into one segment. This way, one Enigma setting is functionally equal to a single scrambler.

Now you can use those scramblers to create an electrical circuit that corresponds to your graph -- scrambler = edge. All scramblers are set to the same initial configuration. The first scramber remains at in the inital configuration, while the second and third get configurations in relation to their edge's numerical value. Configuration in this case means the value of their internal three rotors, so there are 26*26*26 possible settings within each scrambler.

It's basically a sequence of three encryptions.

Example: in our little TEQ triangle, the first scrambler (TE, 2) gets a random starting position. The second scrambler (QE, 5) gets turned three notches, the third scrambler (QT, 3) gets turned one notch. The initial configuration might be wrong, but only the relation between the scramblers matters. A wrong result simply tells you to turn all scramblers another notch, until you get it right.

You have a possibly correct setting when the output matches the input. Specifically, a voltage is applied to the wire of letter "T", leading into the first scrambler. And on a test register attached to the last scrambler, the wire of letter "T" should have a voltage on it as well. If the setting is incorrect, a different letter will light up. Similarly, all incorrect inputs for this particular setup will always light up a different letter at the the end, never the same (thanks to the reflector). If output equals input, you're golden. And if several loops are used, all with the same input/output letter, each of their outputs must equal the input.

To reduce the number of false positives, you need as many connected loops within the crib as possible.

So far, that's an Enigma without a plugboard. To account for that, they introduced feedback loops into the circuit. In our small scale case, the output of the third scrambler would be coupled back into the input of the first scrambler. The number of loops determines the number of possible outcomes with each specific setting. All of these are fed back into the first scrambler of each loop.

The plugboard, however, changed the input into the system of rotors. Instead of a "T" in our example, it might be a "Z", if those two letters were connected on the board.

A random hypothesis is made and fed into the machine. If the scramblers are set incorrectly, a different letter comes out at the end of each loop and is in return fed back into the first scramblers. Result: (almost) everything lights up. If you start with a good graph, everything will light up.

-----
A key element for this was the "diagonal board", which represented a) all possible connections on the plugboard and b) the bidirectional nature of those connections (AB = BA). Maybe it can be explained without pictures, but I sure as hell can't, so "a grid of all possible connections between scramblers and letters + forced reciprocity" will have to suffice.
-----

If, however, the setting was correct, a wrong hypothesis for the input connection merely meant that everything except the right connections was lit up.

Let's say the fix point of the loops in our graph is the letter "T". We assume that it's connected to the letter "Z" on the plugboard. A voltage is applied to "Z" on the test register, and thereby inserted into the circuit at the first scrambler. Loop #1 applies voltage to the letter "A" on the test register, #2 lights up "B", #3 lights up "F". These three outputs are now fed back into the first scrambler, so now the scrambler has voltage on ZABF, which in return lights up ZABF+GEK on the test register.
This goes on until everything except "U" is lit up on the test register. That means three things: a) the settings are correct, b) the hypothesis is wrong, c) "T" is connected to "U".

Reasons:
a) if the settings were incorrect, the entire register would be alive
b) if the hypothesis was correct, only the letter "Z" would be alive on the register
c) due to the feedback loop, the only way for the output to be "U" is if the input was also "U", and the reciprocity within the system makes it impossible for any other input to generate the output "U". Since "T" was the fix point for our loops, "T" is connected to "U".

Similarly, if the initial hypothesis is correct, everything on the test register except "U" stays dead.

The diagonal board provides registers for every single letter and allows the user to pick one as a test register. During operation, all the other registers serve as visual representations of the deductions based on the initial hypothesis. So you actually get to see more than just the initial connection, all based on the same concept.

This is actually the visual representation of Santorum.

A visual representation of his explanation of one being akin to the other.

http://vimeo.com/groups/3114/videos/8069853


>> ^EDD:

gnarly. you seem to know your carbon nanotubes, so care to explain how the potential projected practical applications of graphene stack up to them?

Wow. A dog.

My sympathy for this character just went to zero.

So a vulgar, talentless, slanderer of religion is what passes for an artistic crusader for free speech in Europe?

>> ^Sagemind:

The artist's name is Lars Vilks.
During a free speech lecture in Sweden about the limits of artistic freedom. 15 Muslims screaming “Allahu Akbar” rushed the podium, headbutted Vilks, broke his glasses and tackled him to the floor. The whole assault was caught on tape:
Vilks has been receiving death threats since he drew an image of the prophet Muhammad with a dog’s body.

Most contemporary Sunni Muslims believe that visual depictions of the prophets generally should be prohibited, and they are particularly averse to visual representations of Muhammad.
Lars Vilks said a group of about 15 people had been shouting and trying to interrupt the lecture before the incident at Uppsala University. Vilks told The Associated Press a man in the front row ran up to him and head-butted him during a lecture, breaking his glasses but leaving him uninjured. It wasn’t immediately clear what happened to the attacker.
Lars Vilks Muhammad drawings controversy:
Vilks has faced numerous threats over his controversial drawing of Muhammad with a dog’s body, but Tuesday’s incident was the first time he has been physically assaulted.
Earlier this year U.S. investigators said Vilks was the target of an alleged murder plot involving
Colleen LaRose, an American woman who dubbed herself “Jihad Jane,” and who now faces life in prison. She had pleaded not guilty.

The artist's name is Lars Vilks.
During a free speech lecture in Sweden about the limits of artistic freedom. 15 Muslims screaming “Allahu Akbar” rushed the podium, headbutted Vilks, broke his glasses and tackled him to the floor. The whole assault was caught on tape:
Vilks has been receiving death threats since he drew an image of the prophet Muhammad with a dog’s body.


Most contemporary Sunni Muslims believe that visual depictions of the prophets generally should be prohibited, and they are particularly averse to visual representations of Muhammad.

Lars Vilks said a group of about 15 people had been shouting and trying to interrupt the lecture before the incident at Uppsala University. Vilks told The Associated Press a man in the front row ran up to him and head-butted him during a lecture, breaking his glasses but leaving him uninjured. It wasn’t immediately clear what happened to the attacker.

Lars Vilks Muhammad drawings controversy:
Vilks has faced numerous threats over his controversial drawing of Muhammad with a dog’s body, but Tuesday’s incident was the first time he has been physically assaulted.

Earlier this year U.S. investigators said Vilks was the target of an alleged murder plot involving
Colleen LaRose, an American woman who dubbed herself “Jihad Jane,” and who now faces life in prison. She had pleaded not guilty.

View Production Stills on Flickr:
flickr.com/photos/bentimagelab/sets/72157622256680339/
flickr.com/photos/bentimagelab/sets/72157619746721753/

The indie rock band Modest Mouse is getting the royal treatment from Bent Image Lab’s new director/partner Nando Costa. Just completed, the band’s new music video is a dark and expressive piece of film-making. Heavily rooted in live-action, the impressive six-minute video includes intense moments of stop motion, visual effects, and motion graphics techniques, all brought to life within the studio’s walls.

The visuals follow an artist who enters his personal sanctuary where he is presented with a hand-crafted drawing tool that assists him in materializing his mental impressions. Through drawing circular patterns, the machine discharges an endless web of yarn that guides him through his visual representations of his memories. The story progresses to reveal that he is divided between two worlds, one of dull reality and the second of warped memories. In the process of finding a way out of his consciousness, he is trapped between the two competing spaces, which eventually inflict lethal damage, acting as metaphors to self-destruction.

This lyrical and moving piece was conceived by Nando Costa working closely with lead singer/guitarist Isaac Brock to polish some of the film's intricacies. Featuring a seamless combination of live-action and stop motion that alternates between stage shots of Modest Mouse and a spiraling dream-like world of ever-shifting landscapes, Whale Song is a stunning representation of the combined capabilities of Nando and Bent. The variety and execution of the VFX portions of the video – from yarn reeling into complex patterns to a guitar that plays with no musician attached – strongly evoke the confused and surreal patterns of one's warped memories. Additional creative touches such as animated and intricate photographic collages and giant CG snails sliding across the band's stage – add variety and depth to the surreal world.

More here:- http://vimeo.com/groups/6988/videos/6929537

Picture: "a visual representation (of an object or scene or person or abstraction)" -WordNet

Since light cannot escape from a black hole, the best we can get is the stuff circling the event horizon.

(I'm getting the definite vibe that I need something other than a laptop again. Grrrr. ) For me to have doubled up on this 2 gigs of ram I have, when I got this thing, it would have doubled the price of this laptop I'm pricing out a render box now though, since.. Well, I'm really digging doing this.


In reply to this comment by K0MMIE:
You don't have 256.12647 Megs to spare? Go grab a few sticks of ram!

Best visual representation of god EVER!