There is a phase: "I'm on the weird part of YouTube again." It seems 
quite apt for what happened to me yesterday night.

OK, so first of all, as none of you are probably aware, Valve have been 
producing a whimsical series of videos for Team Fortress 2. The initial 
ones were quite tame. For example,

   http://www.teamfortress.com/classes.php?class=heavy#movie

A rather simple affair. But they've been getting more and more 
elaborate. For example,

   http://www.teamfortress.com/classes.php?class=spy#movie

There's one for every character class. I've basically stopped playing 
TF2 because the game is getting too ridiculous. But I just saw that the 
final video, for my favourite class, is now out:

   http://www.teamfortress.com/classes.php?class=pyro#movie

What an anticlimax. *sigh* Oh well...

In other news, I see that the software they used to make all of these is 
now available for use:

   http://www.sourcefilmmaker.com/post.php?id=8065&p=1

The short version: Source Film Maker lets you load up assets from any 
Source-powered game (e.g., TF2), play the game as normal, record the 
action, and then go back and change anything and everything, from the 
animation to the camera angles to the special effects. This includes 
adding effects which are too slow for real-time, to get a polished look. 
(In the case of TF2, there's also an option to load character models 
with increased polygon counts. Because Valve have produced and released 
those models.)

The long and short of all this is that I ended up hanging around YouTube 
trying to find good SFM videos. As you can imagine, /most/ videos on 
YouTube are just pathetic. For example,

   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=weMpv14cW9U

Even the ones which aren't obviously short test videos or just utter 
silliness aren't very good. It turns out putting together a sequence of 
shots so that the audience understands what the hell is going on isn't 
very easy. Especially when your star characters can only say "I am 
bulletproof!" or "You are not welcome in my world!" or one of a handful 
of other pre-recorded lines.

[You can add any audio you want. But then it won't sound like the 
in-game characters, of course. Unless you hire the actual guy who did 
the voice... Good luck with that!]

So anyway, I'm browsing TF2 videos, when suddenly... I'm watching anime? 
I'm not precisely sure how the heck that happened, but there we go. [I 
think you all know where this is going now...] Now I'd heard that anime 
was strange, but just /how/ strange I hadn't realised. I'll be kind and 
hypothesize that only the really weird crap actually ends up on YouTube 
or something.

So somehow I end up watching a video consisting of freeze-frame shots of 
some girl/women hybrid set to the beat of generic electronic dance 
music. (It always slightly creeps me out how anime females are 6 years 
old from the neck up and 26 double-D from the neck down...) It wouldn't 
surprise me if the images and sound have nothing to do with each other, 
but you have to wonder about who the hell drew the images...

Then things take a turn slightly for the worse. We get an unedited 
video, I'm not sure from what. Little boy has something that 
not-so-little girl wants. [I didn't pick up on what exactly.] Girl 
casually lifts up her skirt to reveal fluffy white knickers with pink 
polka dots and offers to trade. "Why would I want to see your dirty old 
fanny?" asks the boy. The girl flips out with "IT'S NOT DIRTY!!!" She 
then calms down and the scene continues as if nothing unusual had just 
happened. [At least, it does for the next 6 seconds before the clip 
abruptly ends.]

As one commenter wrote, "what the actual fuck, Japan??"

I should probably have stopped clicking things at this point. But I 
didn't. Arguably I got what I deserved for my misplaced curiosity. 
Because the next video was... you know, somehow "monster gang tentacle 
rape" doesn't really convey what my eyes just saw. Neither does "cannot 
unsee". Perhaps the most worrying part is the way we go from a perfectly 
plausible real-world situation to some kind of nightmarish acid-trip in 
just a few split seconds. The first 4 minutes or so looked perfectly 
normal. The remaining 5 minutes... not so much.

(I'm still lost as to how the girl escaped the monsters by diving into 
the swimming pool, sinking to the bottom, touching her reflection in the 
pool bottom, and then her reflection climbing out of the water on some 
remote alien planet... Considering she just out-ran two tentacle 
monsters holding the mutilated skin-sack of the other girl, the fact 
that the pool appears to be over 200 feet deep seems almost 
inconsequential by comparison.)

I decided to click on something else. This looked innocuous enough:

   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SVk9uTPIfHo

It turns out... no, it really isn't. But I dare you to watch it.

At this point, I got smart. Very smart. I closed Firefox and went 
outside for a while. Best decision yet. o_O

Post a reply to this message

watching hentai is as disturbing as watching any bizarre porn.

You should try animé classics like "Akira", "Princess Mononoke", "Cowboy Bebop"
and a few others before dismissing the whole genre... but yeah, there's enough
common quirks and clichés in animé, but those are about the same as in
Disney-alike animation...

Post a reply to this message

nemesis <nam### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> watching hentai is as disturbing as watching any bizarre porn.

And how would you know that? ;)

> You should try anime classics like "Akira", "Princess Mononoke", "Cowboy Bebop"
> and a few others before dismissing the whole genre...

Not to belittle those movies/series (they are excellent on their own
"sub-genre" so to speak) but IMHO they do not perhaps best represent
what (more or less) modern anime is at best. They are classics alright,
but they are also... antiquated in style and technique. They are also a
kind of different "sub-genre" of anime in tone, content and style. Not
all anime is like that.

Personally I find many of the "classic" anime movies and series (especially
those made in the 80's and early 90's) to be quite boring and not very
enticing. I much more prefer modern anime.

Which one would I recommend? That's a really hard question to answer,
and it depends a lot on what kind of TV series you like. Do you like
romantic series with bits of fantasy/scifi? Do you like action-packed
violence? Do you like awesome visuals and animation?

I suppose that if I had to choose just one series to recommend for a
first-time viewer, it would probably be Haruhi Suzumiya. Awesome drawing
and animation quality, interesting story-telling, one of the best modern
anime series in existence (although there are many, many more). If you want
to check something, check this one.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

They're doing a reboot of Sailor Moon next year, I hear.

Haven't really watched any new anime lately.  Last Exile's 2nd series 
was disappointing.  I think the one I watched before that was Hourou 
Musukou, which is nice, then K-ON!!.  Used to watch at least a few each 
new season...ah well.

Looking through my stuff...yeah.  It's been a while since my anime kick. 
  Three favourite series are still Haibane Renmei, Mushishi, and Dennou 
Coil, though there are a few others I could recommend on quality, too.

--
Tim Cook
http://empyrean.sjcook.com

Post a reply to this message

Am 30.07.2012 19:18, schrieb Orchid Win7 v1:

> I decided to click on something else. This looked innocuous enough:
>
>    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SVk9uTPIfHo
>
> It turns out... no, it really isn't. But I dare you to watch it.

Hell's Bells - that's epic indeed!


> At this point, I got smart. Very smart. I closed Firefox and went
> outside for a while. Best decision yet. o_O

You missed this one though:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&v=XIMprgXfrCo&NR=1

Post a reply to this message

Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
> nemesis <nam### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> > watching hentai is as disturbing as watching any bizarre porn.
>
> And how would you know that? ;)

someone told me. :p

> > You should try anime classics like "Akira", "Princess Mononoke", "Cowboy Bebop"
> > and a few others before dismissing the whole genre...
>
> Not to belittle those movies/series (they are excellent on their own
> "sub-genre" so to speak) but IMHO they do not perhaps best represent
> what (more or less) modern anime is at best. They are classics alright,
> but they are also... antiquated in style and technique. They are also a
> kind of different "sub-genre" of anime in tone, content and style. Not
> all anime is like that.
>
> Personally I find many of the "classic" anime movies and series (especially
> those made in the 80's and early 90's) to be quite boring and not very
> enticing. I much more prefer modern anime.

All I know of "modern" animé is Pokémon and One Piece.  Those are terrible, I
much prefer the oldies... :)

Post a reply to this message

clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
> Am 30.07.2012 19:18, schrieb Orchid Win7 v1:
>
> > I decided to click on something else. This looked innocuous enough:
> >
> >    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SVk9uTPIfHo
> >
> > It turns out... no, it really isn't. But I dare you to watch it.
>
> Hell's Bells - that's epic indeed!

delicious animation. :)

>
> > At this point, I got smart. Very smart. I closed Firefox and went
> > outside for a while. Best decision yet. o_O
>
> You missed this one though:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&v=XIMprgXfrCo&NR=1

I've seen it before.  From some Korean guy or something.  Excelent as well and
no gore this time.

Post a reply to this message

"nemesis" wrote:
> clipka wrote:
> > Am 30.07.2012 19:18, schrieb Orchid Win7 v1:
> >
> > > I decided to click on something else. This looked innocuous enough:
> > >
> > >    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SVk9uTPIfHo
> > >
> > > It turns out... no, it really isn't. But I dare you to watch it.
> >
> > Hell's Bells - that's epic indeed!
>
> delicious animation. :)

Agreed, and thanks for the link. I feel like I just got eaten alive by my own
research. (Thesis defense today, part of the extended hazing ritual that passes
for higher professional education here.)

> > > At this point, I got smart. Very smart. I closed Firefox and went
> > > outside for a while. Best decision yet. o_O
> >
> > You missed this one though:
> >
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&v=XIMprgXfrCo&NR=1
>
> I've seen it before.  From some Korean guy or something.  Excelent as well and
> no gore this time.

I got all the way to work one time...

Post a reply to this message

On 30/07/2012 09:54 PM, nemesis wrote:
> watching hentai is as disturbing as watching any bizarre porn.

You say that as if this stuff /isn't/ bizarre porn itself.

> You should try animé classics like "Akira", "Princess Mononoke", "Cowboy Bebop"
> and a few others before dismissing the whole genre... but yeah, there's enough
> common quirks and clichés in animé, but those are about the same as in
> Disney-alike animation...

Yeah, I think I'll give it a miss.

I have no idea what is or is not "anime". I do know that occasionally 
films come on TV which have a distinctly Japanese look to them. And 
usually those are bizarre in the extreme as well...

Post a reply to this message

Am 31.07.2012 06:45, schrieb nemesis:

>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&v=XIMprgXfrCo&NR=1
>
> I've seen it before.  From some Korean guy or something.  Excelent as well and
> no gore this time.

Well, in one scene we /do/ get to see the entrails of an alarm clock ;-)

Post a reply to this message

Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> I have no idea what is or is not "anime". I do know that occasionally 
> films come on TV which have a distinctly Japanese look to them. And 
> usually those are bizarre in the extreme as well...

Sounds like another one of your "I don't know what this is, nor do I want
to find out, and I will spout whatever prejudiced nonsense comes to mind
every time the subject comes up, just as a matter of principle."

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

On 31/07/2012 02:40 PM, Warp wrote:
> Invisible<voi### [at] devnull>  wrote:
>> I have no idea what is or is not "anime". I do know that occasionally
>> films come on TV which have a distinctly Japanese look to them. And
>> usually those are bizarre in the extreme as well...
>
> Sounds like another one of your "I don't know what this is, nor do I want
> to find out, and I will spout whatever prejudiced nonsense comes to mind
> every time the subject comes up, just as a matter of principle."

If you want to see it that way, you're entitled to your opinion. I 
actually meant it more as a "from what I've seen, this probably wouldn't 
interest me".

While we're on the subject, I also don't know what constitutes "garage 
music", but I'm not going to rush out and find out.

Post a reply to this message

On 31/07/2012 2:40 PM, Warp wrote:
> just as a matter of principle."

At least he has principles. </implied smiley>

-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 7/31/2012 4:48 AM, Invisible wrote:
> On 30/07/2012 09:54 PM, nemesis wrote:
>> watching hentai is as disturbing as watching any bizarre porn.
>
> You say that as if this stuff /isn't/ bizarre porn itself.
>
>> You should try animé classics like "Akira", "Princess Mononoke",
>> "Cowboy Bebop"
>> and a few others before dismissing the whole genre... but yeah,
>> there's enough
>> common quirks and clichés in animé, but those are about the same as in
>> Disney-alike animation...
>
> Yeah, I think I'll give it a miss.
>
> I have no idea what is or is not "anime". I do know that occasionally
> films come on TV which have a distinctly Japanese look to them. And
> usually those are bizarre in the extreme as well...
Bebop, other than the ending, and the whole, man, these people are 
morons, and nothing ever really changes for them, theme, running through 
it, isn't too bad. Akira, I found real odd. Princess Mononoke was a bit 
better, but I prefer series myself.

Better bet might be something like Ghost in the Shell.

Post a reply to this message

Patrick Elliott <kag### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> Akira, I found real odd. Princess Mononoke was a bit
> better, but I prefer series myself.

Akira was good I thought, although the first version I ever saw (on VHS) was so
badly translated that I really had no chance of deconvolving the plot. I thought
Princess Mononoke was excellent, but then most of Miyazaki's work is excellent.
I have a soft spot for Nausicaa myself.

> Better bet might be something like Ghost in the Shell.

This. I just finished watching Stand Alone Complex, and I think it's one of the
best tv series of any genre/medium I've ever seen.

Also, I'd advise against Neon Genesis Evangelion as an introduction to anime ;-)

I am now trying to decide on what series to watch next...

Post a reply to this message

On 7/30/2012 18:07, nemesis wrote:
> All I know of "modern" animé is Pokémon and One Piece.  Those
 are terrible, I
> much prefer the oldies... :)

Does stuff like Speed Racer count as anime?

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   "Oh no! We're out of code juice!"
   "Don't panic. There's beans and filters
    in the cabinet."

Post a reply to this message

On 8/3/2012 11:05 AM, Darren New wrote:
> On 7/30/2012 18:07, nemesis wrote:
>> All I know of "modern" animé is Pokémon and One Piece.  Those are
>> terrible, I
>> much prefer the oldies... :)
>
> Does stuff like Speed Racer count as anime?
>
New one, or older one? But, yeah. The older one is in the same art style 
as the recent Anime showing on adult swim, on the cartoon network - 
Cashern Sins.

A lot of the newer US stuff, including the newest teen Iron Man, I think 
would qualify, since its in the same artistic style, more or less. Most 
of the older US work isn't, because they seemed to try damn hard to make 
all the characters look even more crap than the really, really, old 
Anime did. lol

Post a reply to this message

Every now and then, I do find something actually worth watching:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YjfapkWZrDQ

Or something utterly disturbing:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dh9lUjYQQ1w

I guess it isn't just Japan. o_O

Post a reply to this message

On 8/4/2012 11:03, Patrick Elliott wrote:
> On 8/3/2012 11:05 AM, Darren New wrote:
>> On 7/30/2012 18:07, nemesis wrote:
>>> All I know of "modern" animé is Pokémon and One Piece. Thos
e are
>>> terrible, I
>>> much prefer the oldies... :)
>>
>> Does stuff like Speed Racer count as anime?
>>
> New one, or older one?

I meant the original. I wasn't trying to be picky. I was just wondering i
f 
that counts as "anime" to most anime fans, or whether there really needed
 to 
be tentacles involved or something. :-)

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   "Oh no! We're out of code juice!"
   "Don't panic. There's beans and filters
    in the cabinet."

Post a reply to this message

Am 04.08.2012 20:21, schrieb Orchid Win7 v1:
> Every now and then, I do find something actually worth watching:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YjfapkWZrDQ
>
> Or something utterly disturbing:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dh9lUjYQQ1w
>
> I guess it isn't just Japan. o_O

This related clip...:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i6ejPG-i03I

... reminded me of this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ucgHMYf33Q

Post a reply to this message

On 8/4/2012 12:31 PM, Darren New wrote:
> On 8/4/2012 11:03, Patrick Elliott wrote:
>> On 8/3/2012 11:05 AM, Darren New wrote:
>>> On 7/30/2012 18:07, nemesis wrote:
>>>> All I know of "modern" animé is Pokémon and One Piece. Those are
>>>> terrible, I
>>>> much prefer the oldies... :)
>>>
>>> Does stuff like Speed Racer count as anime?
>>>
>> New one, or older one?
>
> I meant the original. I wasn't trying to be picky. I was just wondering
> if that counts as "anime" to most anime fans, or whether there really
> needed to be tentacles involved or something. :-)
>
I think you are confusing Anime and Hentai. lol

And, the later only has tentacles in older, or those still following 
such conventions, ones, along with a lot of blurring, due to some idiot 
idea that its literally OK to show damn near anything other than 
genitals. How they can have special sex apps for phones to meet up for 
it, and some of the insane live shows they do, which involves sex in 
front of studio audiences, and still feel that they need to "blur" 
certain bits, is something I will never understand, at all. but, at 
least, for the most part, they are getting past the whole, "We can't 
show the guy at all, so... hmm, how are you are drawing tentacles?" :p

Post a reply to this message

> How they can have special sex apps for phones to meet up for
> it, and some of the insane live shows they do, which involves sex in
> front of studio audiences, and still feel that they need to "blur"
> certain bits, is something I will never understand, at all.

I feel the same about the concept of "mech".

Post a reply to this message

So the other day, I ended up watching a series of "fail" videos.

Now, while each video is undeniably a fail, some of them you honestly 
have to ask... what were you /expecting/ to happen? I mean, seriously, 
if this hadn't "gone wrong", what would it have even looked like?

I'll never find it again now, but there was one video which actually 
creased me up. OK, so there's a whole series of fails involving various 
sorts of motion sensors. You know the thing of thing; people throwing 
their Wii controllers through the TV screen, punching the person next to 
the in the face, hurting small children, etc. The summary is, /nobody/ 
has a palatial house like the ones you see in the adverts for these 
things, and it's really quite hazardous.

This particular video was special though. OK, so there's a guy at the 
end of a long corridor, dancing around in front of some sort of motion 
detector. (I'm presuming corridor since these things seem to only work 
if you stand ridiculously far back.) The camera appears to be balanced 
on top of the TV, so the guy is facing us.

"Dude, is it on?"
"Yeah, yeah, it's on."
"OK man, let's do it!"

So he starts jumping up and down, and flailing his arms and legs around. 
I have no idea what he's playing, but he's taking it fairly seriously.

And then, a few moments in, a cat wanders in. OK, so I think we all know 
where this is going. Obviously he's going to trip over the cat, or step 
on its tail or something. But no - he accidentally BOOTS THE CAT ACROSS 
THE ROOM. Just kicks it in the stomach and sends it flying. And I'm 
like, OMFG!

But he doesn't just kick it. The cat goes flying and CRASHES INTO THE 
FREAKING CAMERA! And this dude was standing, like, 20 feet away or 
something. And the camera ends up on its side, and we just see the cat 
say "mmmewwwwwwWWWW!" and run away.

That probably doesn't /sound/ very funny. But the whole thing happened 
in, like, 2 seconds flat. I spent about 20 minutes laughing my arse off 
at that. And I'm probably going to hell now...

Post a reply to this message

Am 06.08.2012 11:50, schrieb Invisible:

> But he doesn't just kick it. The cat goes flying and CRASHES INTO THE
> FREAKING CAMERA! And this dude was standing, like, 20 feet away or
> something. And the camera ends up on its side, and we just see the cat
> say "mmmewwwwwwWWWW!" and run away.
>
> That probably doesn't /sound/ very funny. But the whole thing happened
> in, like, 2 seconds flat. I spent about 20 minutes laughing my arse off
> at that. And I'm probably going to hell now...

Don't worry, no going to hell for that. But remember: Every time you 
laugh about a video in which a cat gets hurt, God kills a kitten...

... oh, wait...

Post a reply to this message

On 06/08/2012 06:03 PM, clipka wrote:

> But remember: Every time you
> laugh about a video in which a cat gets hurt, God kills a kitten...
>
> ... oh, wait...

:-D

Post a reply to this message

Le 2012-08-06 05:50, Invisible a écrit :
> This particular video was special though. OK, so there's a guy at the
> end of a long corridor, dancing around in front of some sort of motion
> detector.

Microsoft Kinect.  Their answer to the Wii.  It's been out for two 
years, now.  Even a troglodyte who never gets out of his cave should 
know about it by now...

 > (I'm presuming corridor since these things seem to only work
 > if you stand ridiculously far back.)

Andy makes another erroneous assumption.  Must be a day that ends in Y.

-- 
/*Francois Labreque*/#local a=x+y;#local b=x+a;#local c=a+b;#macro P(F//
/*    flabreque    */L)polygon{5,F,F+z,L+z,L,F pigment{rgb 9}}#end union
/*        @        */{P(0,a)P(a,b)P(b,c)P(2*a,2*b)P(2*b,b+c)P(b+c,<2,3>)
/*   gmail.com     */}camera{orthographic location<6,1.25,-6>look_at a }

Post a reply to this message

On 07/08/2012 12:52 PM, Francois Labreque wrote:
> Le 2012-08-06 05:50, Invisible a écrit :
>> This particular video was special though. OK, so there's a guy at the
>> end of a long corridor, dancing around in front of some sort of motion
>> detector.
>
> Microsoft Kinect. Their answer to the Wii. It's been out for two years,
> now. Even a troglodyte who never gets out of his cave should know about
> it by now...

I know what Kinect is. I wasn't sure whether it's the /only/ such system 
on the market, that's all.

>  > (I'm presuming corridor since these things seem to only work
>  > if you stand ridiculously far back.)
>
> Andy makes another erroneous assumption. Must be a day that ends in Y.

Well let me put it this way: When I tried to play with Kinect, myself 
and my colleagues literally couldn't stand far enough away from the 
sensor due to the wall behind us. The software constantly complained 
that we were standing too close.

Post a reply to this message

On 06/08/2012 10:50 AM, Invisible wrote:

> I'll never find it again now, but there was one video which actually
> creased me up.

I was wrong:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kgK3Hx7VWfQ

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 07 Aug 2012 13:40:24 +0100, Invisible wrote:

> I know what Kinect is. I wasn't sure whether it's the /only/ such system
> on the market, that's all.

Kinect, Wii, PlayStation eye are the ones I'm aware of.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On 07/08/2012 06:11 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Tue, 07 Aug 2012 13:40:24 +0100, Invisible wrote:
>
>> I know what Kinect is. I wasn't sure whether it's the /only/ such system
>> on the market, that's all.
>
> Kinect, Wii, PlayStation eye are the ones I'm aware of.

I know the Wii has hand controllers with velocity sensors. I didn't 
think it had a /visual/ detection system though...

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 07 Aug 2012 20:12:56 +0100, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:

> On 07/08/2012 06:11 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> On Tue, 07 Aug 2012 13:40:24 +0100, Invisible wrote:
>>
>>> I know what Kinect is. I wasn't sure whether it's the /only/ such
>>> system on the market, that's all.
>>
>> Kinect, Wii, PlayStation eye are the ones I'm aware of.
> 
> I know the Wii has hand controllers with velocity sensors. I didn't
> think it had a /visual/ detection system though...

Hmmm, now you mention it, I'm not sure that one is visual either.  The 
PS3 one is, though.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
> > I know the Wii has hand controllers with velocity sensors. I didn't
> > think it had a /visual/ detection system though...

> Hmmm, now you mention it, I'm not sure that one is visual either.  The 
> PS3 one is, though.

The Wii can detect where you are pointing the controller at, and it does
this using infrared sensors. (I don't remember for sure, but I think it
was like the infrared leds are at the TV, and the controller has a sensor
that detects where the infrared light is coming from.)

The Kinect is much more advanced in that it actually detects your entire
body (and can recognize the positions of heads, hands and feet). I think
that it can even recognize individual people to a certain extent, but I
might remember wrong.

On the other hand, you can't "point at" anything with the Kinect, like
you can with the Wii controller. (You can simply "place" eg. your hand
at a certain location on the screen, but that's not the same as pointing
at it.)

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

On 8/7/2012 14:21, Warp wrote:
> that it can even recognize individual people to a certain extent, but I
> might remember wrong.

It can recognize "player one" vs "player two". It can't recognize "fred" vs 
"mary."

In other words, it can keep track of people it has seen recently. It doesn't 
do face recognition or anything, but it can tell when someone walks off and 
someone different walks into view, or when two players switch places, or 
something like that.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   "Oh no! We're out of code juice!"
   "Don't panic. There's beans and filters
    in the cabinet."

Post a reply to this message