To some extend I agree, that if you are professional in some are, current LLMs may not solve the issues you are facing. But, while I consider myself as "expert" in one very specific area, and don't find huge help from ChatGPT in that domain, I don't live in a bubble. I have to sometime touch on completely orthogonal skills where I am not expert at all. And in these areas, I get huge benefit even though LLMs give me "average" responses. It is still better than my own, below average judgements. That is very strong point.
My background is in image processing and I can see quite clearly that the high frequency noise happens when you subtract two images, one of which is shifted by half-pixel for instance. What you are left with is the edges (high frequency) of the image. The same applies to 1D in my opinion. For this reason I am not convinced (1) is actually true. The argument about lack of low frequency is interesting, who knows what is happening there indeed.
I am not expert, but if you don't use noise cancellation you would probably do better with standard headphones where you pay for the sound quality instead.
I purchased Bose QC-35 II as well. I don't have chemical burns, but after a while of wearing my ears become really sensitive. I feel strange pain while wearing them. This applies only when the noise cancelation is ON. When it is off the pain immediately disappears. My explanation is that these phones actually generate inverse signal to the noise, but due to various factors such as delay, the cancellation is not perfect and what I am actually getting into the ear is the residual high frequency noise, which may in fact be quite dangerous. Anybody else experienced this? There might be some study about it ...
I am honestly shocked by that! When you google authors name, you get bunch of anime faces + GAN research papers. So clearly, this is not a joke, but his personal interest/fetish developed after long hours behind his PC. I believe he needs medical treatment and not propose "startup ideas"!
To a colorblind person (me included), this discussion is absolutely irrelevant. Why not to focus on edges instead?
A black and white picture would solve all such nonsense.
This is important point indeed. Here is what helps myself, when thinking about pixels.
- pixels are point samples in 2D space
- their position is exact
- position of of top-left point is (0,0)
- position of bottom right is (cols-1,rows-1)
This way all math work (subsampling, affine or perspective warps, lens distortion, or even warping between image and any layer neural network). Failure to do that, will cause subtle issues that will degrade your performance. These will become quite important when working
with pixel accurate methods (3d object tracking, object detection in tiny resolutions and 1-1 mapping between OpenGL and Neural Network). So I have to agree, pixels are not tiny squares, they are dots in 2d space.
I was wondering, how much different the simulation would be from stock models from Turbosquid: https://www.turbosquid.com/3d-models/formula-1-season-2020-3...
The article mentions there were some problematic areas in the extracted model. So I am quite skeptical that the model is indeed more accurate than what you can easily get from legal sources.
Interesting point, which a little bit implies that Williams would have the best aerodynamics by now. But clearly that is still not the case. So I am quite skeptical, whether CFD time has indeed the effect it aims to have. We all know that knowledge which you build up over time as a developer pays in long term. So even thou teams like Mercedes may have shorter time for CFD, they have the knowledge base build up over time which they use heavily.
If you subscribe to F1TV you get timing data in form of additional screen which you can view. Apart of that, there were several attempts in the past to extract timing data from from live streams, which stopped around 2016 when the API was changes. So to my knowledge, there is no free API for that. If there was payed version, I would be also interested, but I don't know about it either. The thing is that F1 considers this traditionally very sensitive information and is unlikely to make it public any time soon.
Since Williams defines the very bottom of the race grid, they don't have much to hide in terms of technology. So releasing a 3D model of their car in this form is nothing that would harm the team at this time.
While I believe this is interesting project, I got really distracted by the PR around it. "scientist love flow chart" is like talking to babies and making fun of science at the same time. The fake scientist in all pictures ... probably I am not the target audience here.