It's no big deal. You can hear the wind howl but as you can see the power is still on and it's pretty much right on top of us.

Very funny. Actually I'm thinking of swapping the 5s and 9s and if that doesn't work changing the order of the numbers. And if that doesn't work I think I'm out of ideas.

I met her at a one time event so going back there won't help and we didn't have name tags. I know she works in a boutique but I have no idea which one. For the most part we were talking about trivial stuff like what movies we like as well as stuff like what profession she wanted to get into. And believe it or not she actually seemed interested in our profession and asked me a fair number of questions about it. Thanks everyone for your replies

Two nights ago I met this really nice girl down in Philadelphia, chatted with her, and got her number (or I thought I did). I should have had her put the number in or given her my number or texted right away to make sure the number was correct but I didn't. So last night I sent her a text so she would know it was me that was calling her and asked her if it was a good time to talk. About 1 am they texted back that I have the wrong number and they don't know anyone by that name. It's possible she gave me a fake number but I kind of doubt it cause 609 is a real New Jersey area code and 651 is a real exchange within that code. So I suspect I got one of the last 4 digits wrong or transposed some numbers. So here's what I know. She has a VERY unusual first name which I know the spelling of cause I asked her, I know her age, and a bunch of miscellaneous details which probably aren't useful for finding her. But I don't know her last name. I tried: 1) Searching her first name on Facebook and Google with no luck. 2) I would use the internet white pages but they require a last name which I don't know. Anyone know a way to search by first name? 3) Tonight I'm thinking I'm going to try switching some of the numbers and see if I reach her. Apparently 5s and 9s are the most commonly confused digits and she has lots of them in her number. So this is a smart group anyone have any other ideas besides the ones I just listed in case the last one doesn't work? Thanks, Mike Additional Details: I met her at a one time event so going back there won't help and we didn't have name tags. I know she works in a boutique but I have no idea which one. Thanks everyone for your replies

Google will give you lots of them. You can also try the term rapid prototyping. This place will give you lots of quotes mfg.com. This place can do it too quickparts.com. You'll need CAD drawings though.

A similar idea exist in computer aided drafting called "snap points". In that case if you are close to something like say the end of a line it will act as if you clicked on the end of the line.

Everybody seems to hate Terminator 3 but I think that's just cause T2 set the bar impossibly high. I thought it was almost as good and call me morbid but I loved the suprise ending.

What I find most disturbing as an American is that our government won't take any real steps to prevent the same thing from happening here. I've seen other European countries taking preemptive steps to head off a similar crisis in their country even though it's not popular with a lot of people but in this country we keep acting like we haven't been warned. The Democrats won't agree to anything other than superficial spending cuts and the Republicans won't agree to any tax increases at all. The USA's debt to GDP is almost as bad as Greece, I guess the creditor just trust us more to pay our bills. But I don't think it will be many years before the same thing happens here.

It's actually improving I think because the first letter I tried to write with it it would frequently get every single word of an entire sentence wrong. Actually I didn't expect it to get Via Voice right even though I tried to add it to the dictionary but if you look closely it made a lot of mistakes. Funniest one I think was appalling became Spalding :-D. If this thing doesn't improve I will probably try dragon but I'll let you know how it goes.

Thanks for the info. If the windows stuff doesn't improve rapidly I'll probably buy that. Thanks.

Just thought it would be funny to post the kinds of mistake Windows voice recognition makes if you don't correct the errors. Same message as above. I am writing a program of my own and I’m going to need to do documentation to. To make that faster I enabled windows speech recognition because when it doesn’t make mistakes beat recognition is much faster than typing. However, at this point the accuracy of rate to Spalding. In fact it seems slower than a program I own 10 years ago put out by IBM called be a voice. However, be a voice had you do about ½ hour of voices reading for it and Microsoft does that. Since all voice recognition programs learn your voice over time and since little training was done with Microsoft I suspect it will get better time. So has anybody used it before and it doesn’t get better question and just out of curiosity how well does see rework question And just for kicks and giggles I will break the same thing over again without making air corrections.

I am writing a program of my own and I’m going to need to do documentation soon. To make that faster I enabled windows speech recognition because when it doesn’t make mistakes speech recognition is much faster than typing. However, at this point the accuracy rate is appalling. In fact it seems lower than a program I owned 10 years ago put out by IBM called Via Voice. However, Via Voice had you do about ½ hour of voice training for it and Microsoft doesn’t. Since all the voice recognition programs learn your voice over time and since little training was done with the Microsoft I suspect it will get better with time. So has anybody used it before and does it get much better? Has anybody used dragon before and the windows version and tell me which one is better? And just out of curiosity how well does Siri work? And just for kicks and giggles I will to write this same thing over again without making error corrections.

No we were using Intel chips but there were plans to move to ARM. I wouldn't think that anything would be different though. QT is designed to be cross platform. Also I think Nokia did a lot of the development of QT for their cell phones and since most cell phones use ARM I'd be suprised if ARM wasn't thoroughly supported.

I guess it depends what type of embedded programming you are doing. But I would say I had a pretty positive impression of it. The framework was very comprehensive. It seemed like literally anything you could think of existed in qt. This included even standard objects. For instance there's qstrings, qmakefiles, qxml ect... . I would recommend if you use qt that you use the Qx or QTx version of things because everything in qt is designed to work together it seems like. In general the QT version will tend to be similar or simplified from the standard c/c++ library version of things. We were doing linux programming for a custom linux based thin client OS and for some of the server software to control the thin clients so if you are doing an embedded linux application it should be a good choice.

I had a short contract job where we used the qt framework in all of our c/c++ development. We didn't actually use the IDE though just the framework. The development was done on the linux commmand line. Was there something you wanted to know about it?

I'm not very familiar with photoshop or this particular function is but since no one else has answered I'll try and help you but I may be misunderstanding the question. Colors are normally represented as 3 bytes. One for red, one for green, and one for blue (RGB)and all colors are a mixture of those 3 values. So if I understand the question right all you would need to do is get those values and then compare them. Maybe you could elaborate on what this Photoshop function does and more people would be able to help you.

BCDXBOX360 wrote:

But they can recognize objects effectively,right? my main interest is recognition, the question is how much does depth perception affect recognition of objects? well i do know of 3d face recognition being more accurate than the 2d counterparts but this requires 3d sensing putting a strain on cpu's. and what about all the 2d images and videos available, how will your 3d system make use of them?

I would assume yes because I've never seen anything written on that subject. So you are probably right that it is possible, but I still suspected it will learn faster with 3D.

BCDXBOX360 wrote:

mikemarquard wrote:

The reason you and I can see in 3D if we cover an eye is because as children we
learned other ques for judging depth

Thank you, because thats my solution, my system learns those ques during the learning phase by presenting multi-view training sets like i wrote earlier.

Yeah but that's the point I was making earlier. Without some preexisting method for judging distances you have nothing to use as a measuring stick when your system would learn those cues. That's why people born blind in one eye don't learn those cues, because they cannot use stereopsis as a measuring stick. They have no way to see how things like for instance the size of an object corresponds with it's distance from the viewer because they never actually know how far the object is from them.

BCDXBOX360 wrote:

Don't worry i'm not like that, i also enjoy discussing with people of similar interest, besides there are'nt many daredevil's to go down this path, it's gud to always hear from people like you. i wish you luck in your endeavor.

Thanks

BCDXBOX360 wrote:

i can't fully agree with you, look at chess, can you beat a computer at it's highest skill level, i don't think so!

That's only cause computers can look at millions or even billions of times as many moves as a human can. It's actual understanding of the game is extremely weak. Look at some other games where brute force methods are less practical. Go and Arimaa are good examples. There was even a million dollar prize offered if anyone could write a good Go program by the year 2000 and nobody collected it http://senseis.xmp.net/?IngPrize[^] and there is currently a prize for Arimaa http://arimaa.com/arimaa/[^] IBM's watson was much more impressive http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=watson&aq=f[^] but even it is only a souped up search engine, it doesn't really understand the words it's talking about it just looks at how words are used together.

BCDXBOX360 wrote:

the problem with machines of today is that they just lack perceptual skills or what is called sensory perception

I totally agree with you. True AI will never happen till the AI actually understands the meaning of the words it is talking about.

BCDXBOX360 wrote:

my system also implements a knowledge transfer technique for one-short learning (this reduces training sets as the system learns more and more things, just like humans!) and animals/humans can see effectively with a single eye proving that depth adds very little information(maybe little enough to be ignored for now)

Actually its been found that if a person is born blind in one eye they never develop proper depth perception. The reason you and I can see in 3D if we cover an eye is because as children we learned other ques for judging depth. However, we needed 2 eyes to learn these ques because without them we have very little information to accurately gauge where an object is at and thus know how other ques corresponds to a particular location. I would say this; I don't know of any animal that has only 1 eye so I think depth perception must be important and parallax shift or I think the proper term is stereopsis is important. PS If you were the person who downvoted me I'm not trying to be critical or discourage you, I just enjoy debating these topics with people of similar interest and hearing their opinions.

It sounds like your ideas and my ideas are a lot different. Actually my ideas ideas are a lot different than any of the ideas I've read about and my image segmentation is technically not an edge detection algorithm either. I wish you the best of luck and if you have some big successes I'd love to hear about it.

BCDXBOX360 wrote:

3. My system is not currently designed to use stereo cameras it uses a single camera and does not need depth or capturing a 3D representation to aid recognition.

You might have more limited aims than I do but I have to question this one. If you're trying to build something that is capable of doing what a human or animal can do I don't see how this can work cause clearly humans and animals see in 3d. Also if you choose this path keep in mind objects look radically different from different views. Without some sort of 3d perception it is going to be difficult to get the system to recognize multiple views as being part of the same object.