search results matching tag: realistic

» channel: motorsports

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.001 seconds

    Videos (303)     Sift Talk (11)     Blogs (50)     Comments (1000)   

Amazing New Japanese Hanabi Fireworks

newtboy says...

It means both, and everything in between.
Like art, the level of detail, work, or competence involved have no bearing on whether it’s cgi, only is it an image that’s been created or altered digitally. Period.
CGI is not a term reserved for multi million dollar high res photo realistic purely computer created images. Any image altered or created digitally is cgi.
I get that you disagree with the established definition. That doesn’t change it.

Removing a mole digitally is cgi.

Any image generated by a computer is cgi, including alterations. That’s what cgi means!

kir_mokum said:

"CGI can alter the color and intensity of light, changing the appearance of an actor’s face or body in a shot."

this means building a digi double of an actor's face or body, match moving/rotomating it, relighting it with scene lights, then a shit ton of work in comp. NOT a colour correct or a shitty filter. it's a huge amount of work.

Missouri tries to legislate reality away

newtboy says...

You got a very straight answer, you just didn’t like it. Ironic to claim something you don’t like doesn’t exist while arguing that something that doesn’t exist bothers you.

I’ll try again, but I can only explain it to you, I can’t understand it for you. Women can outperform men, so clearly there’s more to it than just gender, more than just the shape of your 23/24th chromosome. If there wasn’t, the worst man would always outperform the best woman. That being the case, discriminating based on gender is not just wrong, it’s illegal. That goes for trans people too, they aren’t excluded from having rights just because you seem to want it that way.

I note there’s no answer at all about excluding a group of citizens from publicly funded events. Don’t like that question I guess. No answer for it, I guess. Straight or otherwise. Last try to get anything resembling a answer at all.

Absolutely a blatant Red herring. I refuse to cooperate with your ridiculous loaded cherry picked false premise fantasy.
Try asking a realistic question on point instead of a loaded, ridiculous fantasy hypothetical you think makes your point. Your question implies that you believe trans women are just ordinary men.

If we pick the 100m sprint and had the two categories and trans people were allowed to compete with their current gender (with specific requirements, like they are), would you expect the trans athletes to always dominate?
Same question, but 50k race.

If so, why?
If so, explain why that hasn’t happened even though they’ve been competing in the Olympics under those rules for near 20 years now.
If not, what’s your point? I think I know, your point is that trans women are men, an ignorant, inflammatory, intentional insult to them and what they go through to be comfortable in their own bodies.
No surprise since you support just excluding them because you assume wrongly that a trans woman is a man in a dress. It’s ignorance and intolerance dancing together in your mind, making false assumptions and attempting to deny rights to others based on them. I might note, sexual orientation and gender are two categories that in America we are barred from using to discriminate against someone. I must assume you aren’t American, so what’s your dog in this fight? Just trans hatred?

Now explain why trans kids shouldn’t be allowed to compete in school competitions. Last try to get an answer.

Now explain how this is different from the racist arguments for excluding blacks from sports.

Edit: now explain why women like these need protection from other women….

bcglorf said:

@newtboy,

Last try to get anything resembling a straight answer.

If we pick specifically the 100m race as an event: If the olympics had but a single open category to all sex and genders, do you expect to see biologically female competitors ever making it into qualifying and competition?

Animated Short using the Unreal Engine | Irradiation

Is Meat REALLY Bad For The Climate?

newtboy says...

A 2012 United Nations report summarized 65 different estimated maximum sustainable population size and the most common estimate was 8 billion. Advocates of reduced population often put forward much lower numbers. Paul R. Ehrlich stated in 2018 that the optimum population is between 1.5 and 2 billion

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sustainable_population

Since we are at or near 8 billion and are far from sustainable, haven’t been for over 50 years, I think the 1.5 number is far more realistic, maybe even high. I think the 8 billion estimates assume international cooperation, constant advances in farming tech with constantly increasing yields (that aren’t happening), and don’t account for climate change disrupting supply chains and production at various levels….so wishful thinking.

War sucks for population control. It’s messy, expensive, destructive of both infrastructure and ecology, and just crap at killing meaningful numbers. We need to reduce by billions, the worst war killed a few million and destroyed much of Europe. A war that kills 1000 times more people….yikes. Forget global warming, hello planetary disintegration.

The only acceptable method IMO is quit having children, then you don’t kill anyone to achieve sustainability. For some idiotic reason, average people find the idea of not having excess children horrific and totally out of the question, but the idea of starving their children to death seems to garner a “shit happens”.

Agreed, we need something like an airborne infectious prion where there could be no vaccine, no sterilization, no escape…..only that would wipe out everyone so maybe not that.

cloudballoon said:

Sources for the 8-10 billion & 1.5 billion figures? I'm just both fascinated & concerned about how the scientists come up with those numbers and what tech & better farming can do.

Yeah I agree the human population can't just grow & grow. But it seems the only way to do that is 1) war & 2) high cost of living has worked so far. Diseases used to be a fair equalizer as well, but with advanced R&D, even a pandemic like what we have is able to prevent mass casuality rates of the past.

Realistic lightsaber battle

lucky760 says...

Phenomenal. Really enjoyed that.

But um, excuse me...

after ALL that stuff about making it realistic, HOW IN THE WORLD did they let the guy lay down on his back with the sword's "blade" resting across his stomach???

That aside, well done!

(PS5) RIDE 4 | Ultra High Realistic Graphics

newtboy says...

Stunning! *quality stuff
Unfortunately reviews say the difficulty is just as realistic, so if you aren’t a superbike rider you’ll have trouble advancing.

Still, we’ve come one hell of a long way since excite bike!
I hope Road Redemption, the upcoming Road Rash style motorcycle combat game, looks 1/2 that good.

TX law & tattoos

Anom212325 says...

"So you agree that women wanting to leave TX to receive this, should be allowed? Right? Easy is the word." yes, but don't expect to return because you committed murder and that's a crime in Texas.

"You'd be against the idea that anyone could be fined or arrested for transporting the women. Right? Easy enough." Helping to commit murder is a crime.

"So if it wasn't easy for a poor person to travel - your okay w/groups or even businesses helping those who don't like it to get them out of TX? Right? Letting them get the procedure and returning them after. Paying for their travel is an easy solution to the problem - right? " Again, all of those examples are accomplices in committing murder.

"And if it became the norm, are your okay with independent services or organized groups - like an over-the-ground railroad - helping women to get out of states that make it impossible to get a legalized abortion into states that have more realistic laws? If it's done in another state, doesn't break TX's law (or any other state's) - then no crime. Right? No trouble for her or from the state of TX (or any other state entity). Easy peezy." Again, all of those examples are accomplices in committing murder.

"So you are easily in agreement w/the ease of these solutions. Right?" Yes, commit murder and expect the full extent of the law in Texas.

"They don't like it. They can take it to another state. " Yes, just don't return because you committed murder.

"As easy as that?" yes as easy as that. Murder is a crime. Can't be simpler.

noseeem said:

So you agree that women wanting to leave TX to receive this, should be allowed? Right? Easy is the word.

You'd be against the idea that anyone could be fined or arrested for transporting the women. Right? Easy enough.

You'd be against reporting people that aid in getting the women into a state that is allows the legal procedure - right? Fall off the log easy.

So if it wasn't easy for a poor person to travel - your okay w/groups or even businesses helping those who don't like it to get them out of TX? Right? Letting them get the procedure and returning them after. Paying for their travel is an easy solution to the problem - right?

And if it became the norm, are your okay with independent services or organized groups - like an over-the-ground railroad - helping women to get out of states that make it impossible to get a legalized abortion into states that have more realistic laws? If it's done in another state, doesn't break TX's law (or any other state's) - then no crime. Right? No trouble for her or from the state of TX (or any other state entity). Easy peezy.

So you are easily in agreement w/the ease of these solutions. Right?

They don't like it. They can take it to another state.

Easy.

As easy as that?

TX law & tattoos

noseeem says...

So you agree that women wanting to leave TX to receive this, should be allowed? Right? Easy is the word.

You'd be against the idea that anyone could be fined or arrested for transporting the women. Right? Easy enough.

You'd be against reporting people that aid in getting the women into a state that is allows the legal procedure - right? Fall off the log easy.

So if it wasn't easy for a poor person to travel - your okay w/groups or even businesses helping those who don't like it to get them out of TX? Right? Letting them get the procedure and returning them after. Paying for their travel is an easy solution to the problem - right?

And if it became the norm, are your okay with independent services or organized groups - like an over-the-ground railroad - helping women to get out of states that make it impossible to get a legalized abortion into states that have more realistic laws? If it's done in another state, doesn't break TX's law (or any other state's) - then no crime. Right? No trouble for her or from the state of TX (or any other state entity). Easy peezy.

So you are easily in agreement w/the ease of these solutions. Right?

They don't like it. They can take it to another state.

Easy.

As easy as that?

Anom212325 said:

The majority voted for it and want it in Texas. Don't like it get out of Texas. As easy as that.

Surprise Gifted Sneaky NYC Subway Painted Portraits

lucky760 says...

WOW!!! The feels.

So heartwarming.

Guy's freaking talented too. Love how it starts as a big oval then all of a sudden it's a photo-realistic perfect depiction.

Man, it's incredible.

BSR (Member Profile)

chicchorea says...

Let's see now, you messaged me repeatedly in a short time frame then with no mind that there was no realistic way that I would know such, precipitously instabanned a member empowered to confer this particular invocation and that action based not upon failure to adhere to prescribed policy but on your own arbitrary basis.

Either you have not read, or having done so and fail at retention, or feel specially empowered to perform invocations above your station. In any case you have exceeded your bounds.

Please, will someone levy the same upon this member rightfully until admin(s) may rectify the matter.

I remember this to be a serious infraction.


CC: @dag

CC: lucky760

BSR said:

Fortunately, I don't lack respect for fellow sifters and their comments and conversations.

Had I been someone new to VS and wanted to check out the comment section I would have disregarded joining the site simply because of the appearance of an attention whore poster.

I did try to get your attention as a friend to ask you to maybe limit how many "dead" posts you make at once so as to not push recent comments and conversations into oblivion.

When you didn't respond I assumed you were not interested and just continued on.

This isn't so much about the rules as it is about respecting fellow sifters.

I hope you and I can stand on common ground.

https://youtu.be/lp7cc-goVnA

CC: @dag

CC: @lucky760

Shooting An Anvil Into The Sky

newtboy (Member Profile)

Almost car jacked by Cartel in Nuevo Laredo.

Janus says...

Sounds good, but realistically then they likely have your license plate number and a grudge to settle.

EDIT:
Not to mention those other cars they were using to block the lanes, of course.

newtboy said:

Run them over. Now they’re still there for the next guy.

Republicans Try to Dismiss Trumps Second Impeachment Trial

newtboy says...

It would be more convenient to go with a majority vote to bar him from office if it was that simple, but I don't think it really is. (In reality I think that's maybe not the best move, because if he can run and starts a new conservative party, it will guarantee a Democratic landslide because the liberal vote won't be cut in half)
No matter the method, it's imperative that calling for the overturn of a certified election by any means necessary, and sending a crowd to force trial by combat, instructing them to stop the congressional certification, don't let it happen (which is a a direct call for interference in government proceedings only possible by force) be punished not ignored or it begs for a repeat. It's far from just using the word fight, it's saying if you let them certify this election you lose your country, you've got to get rid of these representatives that won't go along with you, and fight hard, you can't let them install Biden, stop it, he's illegitimate and I won by a landslide but Biden stole it, do not let them certify him or you're country is gone they must elect me, I'll be there with you stopping the steal.

I seriously doubt the American people will see it that way, all polls show a majority agree with his policies over Trump's. The election reinforces that.

It's hard to imagine hurting the economy worse than Trump's disastrous pandemic response that continues to cause more damage today because the distribution part of his "plan" was 1/2 baked and 1/4 implemented. Hundreds of millions of vaccines are being shipped to Europe because he wouldn't commit to buying them when he could, even knowing he couldn't buy them later. Any misstep in the response cost lives and hurt the economy horrifically.
Then there's the 8-9 trillion added to the debt not including last year's unprecedented spending spree during a recession meaning the deficit his last year may be well over $4-5 trillion (I've seen estimates of $9 Trillion). The debt and deficit will be hard to screw up worse, but time will tell.

Let's be realistic that the majority of Americans never wanted Trump, so much they voted for Hillary the most despised politician at the time, 3 million more times...it took nothing but not ignoring swing states and not being the most hated candidate in living memory to flip the electoral vote. Trump becoming the most despised candidate in history helped.

It wasn't a few thousand, my recollection is it was hundreds of thousands in most critical states, only a few were even close, only Georgia was as close as 12000, still more than a few, and Biden won easily without it.

The green new deal, if implemented, should create tens of thousands of good paying jobs. Innovation almost always pays off....again, time will tell. I'm of the opinion that it's too late to avoid climate disaster, probably too late to avoid a near total extinction next century without a miracle, but any mitigation is worth trying if it works. I don't want to live on Venus....and don't want my grand nieces and nephews to either.

I'll agree to disagree about guns. I've heard the same fear my entire life, claims democrats will take guns away, I once believed it. It's never happened even when they had the house, Senate, and Whitehouse. I'm pro gun and pro regulation.....a well regulated militia is what the constitution says. I respect your position even if I disagree.

I am a stickler for not fudging terminology. It makes understanding another person's argument impossible if they use words that are just wrong just because other people are misusing them, and is often used intentionally as a means of escaping one's statements by saying they didn't mean what they said, but only when tightly cornered. That's not an accusation, just a peeve. Bob, to name one, insists Trump's never been impeached.

Mordhaus said:

I could quote legal scholars who think otherwise, but since it is kind of split down the middle, you would be able to find just as many that argue that it is constitutional. My opinion goes towards the non-constitutional side. He isn't a sitting President any longer and the only reason Democrats are doing this is because, as you mentioned, it is a much higher bar to convince a jury that using the word 'Fight' means a call to insurrection. If they could manage to force it through the easier method, then they can simply call for a majority vote and block him from running again in 2024.

That is the net goal of the Democrats, because they fear he will win once people realize how badly the new ecological policies and debt from a further stimulus is going to hurt our economy. Let's be realistic in that it took Trump fucking up multiple times, the worst pandemic in 100 years, and the entire Democratic voting bloc turning out for Biden to win by a few thousand in the critical states that gave him the electoral mandate. I can't vote for him again, but there are plenty who would. Mostly poor and middle class working people who are going to be realizing just how bad Biden is going to fuck up the economy in the short term over his appeasement of portions of the green new deal.

We've discussed the gun situation to death. I could post quotes from Kamala and Biden, as well as his stated plan for gun control he put up on his site, but it would again serve no purpose. You feel that nothing will happen or it will only be limited to scary 'assault rifles'. I feel otherwise. We can bang our heads against the metaphorical wall over and over, but in the end neither of us is going to change the other's mind on gun control.

Sadly, in my case, that still means that unless Democrats do a 180 on gun control and illegal immigration I will continue to be forced to vote for Republicans. Also, yes, I mean the trial, but can we not split hairs? It's like asking for a Kleenex and getting nagged that you really meant Puffs.

Republicans Try to Dismiss Trumps Second Impeachment Trial

Mordhaus says...

I could quote legal scholars who think otherwise, but since it is kind of split down the middle, you would be able to find just as many that argue that it is constitutional. My opinion goes towards the non-constitutional side. He isn't a sitting President any longer and the only reason Democrats are doing this is because, as you mentioned, it is a much higher bar to convince a jury that using the word 'Fight' means a call to insurrection. If they could manage to force it through the easier method, then they can simply call for a majority vote and block him from running again in 2024.

That is the net goal of the Democrats, because they fear he will win once people realize how badly the new ecological policies and debt from a further stimulus is going to hurt our economy. Let's be realistic in that it took Trump fucking up multiple times, the worst pandemic in 100 years, and the entire Democratic voting bloc turning out for Biden to win by a few thousand in the critical states that gave him the electoral mandate. I can't vote for him again, but there are plenty who would. Mostly poor and middle class working people who are going to be realizing just how bad Biden is going to fuck up the economy in the short term over his appeasement of portions of the green new deal.

We've discussed the gun situation to death. I could post quotes from Kamala and Biden, as well as his stated plan for gun control he put up on his site, but it would again serve no purpose. You feel that nothing will happen or it will only be limited to scary 'assault rifles'. I feel otherwise. We can bang our heads against the metaphorical wall over and over, but in the end neither of us is going to change the other's mind on gun control.

Sadly, in my case, that still means that unless Democrats do a 180 on gun control and illegal immigration I will continue to be forced to vote for Republicans. Also, yes, I mean the trial, but can we not split hairs? It's like asking for a Kleenex and getting nagged that you really meant Puffs.

newtboy said:

Impeachment already happened for a second time. You mean the trial.

It is pretty definitely constitutional because he was impeached while still the sitting president.

One reason for it is, in a criminal trial, they have to prove he intended to start a violent insurrection, a very difficult bar to clear especially considering his contradictory instructions in his speech and his mental state....in an impeachment trial they only have to show that his words incited it, not his intent. That’s a no brainer.

The only way it hurts Democrats in 2022 is it would hinder his creating a new party that would split “conservative” votes and guarantee victory for democrats across the board. Thinking conservatives should be itching for conviction and a ban from office to save the Republican party in 2022, if he’s let off conservatives are domed....republicans can’t win without Trumpists, Trump can’t win without Republicans. Conversely, letting him off with no consequences would hurt the democrat vote badly...why elect them if they let Republicans get away with everything including violent and deadly insurrection and attempted assassination.

Your fear of libs coming for your guns makes me sad. You drank the fear flavored koolaid, they just aren’t unless you go violently nuts, stalk someone, or beat your wife up, or if you need to buy them illegally because you’re a felon. Note, the NRA went bankrupt under Trump and McConnel, not Biden.

If Republicans want to fight everything because a murderous and treasonous coup is prosecuted as if it were disturbing the peace with no prison time possible, they should be tossed as traitors to the constitution that they swore to uphold that requires a punishment for inciting insurrection and attempting a government overthrow. Really, they want an excuse for fighting everything, it’s a foregone conclusion that they will no matter what, they have zero interest in compromise or bipartisanship. They insisted Trump had a mandate and should ignore Democrats completely because he won the electoral college, but now that Biden won it and the popular vote and the house and senate they insist he has no mandate and must let the minority call the shots. It’s not consistent because they aren’t honest about anything anymore.

No one that thinks prosecuting directing an attempted coup is wrong would be voting democrat anyway. Prosecuting incitement of murderous insurrection is not vengeance, it’s barely a thin slice of justice, but it’s the best that can be reasonably hoped for in today’s hyper partisan climate.



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