You look beyond the writing so that your eyes start to slip out of focus on the text and give a double image. Like how if you look at your computer screen while having a finger in front of your eyes, you'll see a double image of your finger. But in this case you need to manage looking beyond the screen with no true object to focus on.
Once you manage that double vision, you adjust your focus until one eye's view shifts to the right far enough that the first column lines up with the second column. You can adjust your distance from the image to help with that. Once they line up, for me it feels like it almost snaps into place - at that point I can look around the 3D image without breaking lock on the lined-up view. You now have three readable columns plus two ghost-like half visible ones on each side, and those particular words stand out as if they're in front of the rest.
Ignoring the two 'ghost' columns:
'STARING' is in column 2
'By staring at the night' is in column 1
'I'm lost' is in column 2
'And I wonder where my dreams disappeared' is in column 3
'Wayne Myers 30th Dec, 2009' is in column 2
Obviously, all that text is in all columns. but those are the ones where it's been made to stand out in 3D. It also reads from top to bottom.
Thanks - took me ages to get this one. Ended up copying it into Notepad and then could see it. It's fun to edit the text while viewing it in 3D - you can cause more of the text to jump out of the page.
I love my XM5s. I mow with them on, I row with them on, I take Zoom calls and phone calls with them on, they work great. I love the pass thru mode to hear ambient noises too.
What are you on about? Youtube's auto generated subtitles are pretty good. granted, 5-10% of them are miss, but they usually convey at least enough to grasp the context. I would be lost without them (I'd have to be listening to really loud sound and/or focus more intensively to what is said)
This has really not been my experience... until just now.
A few times before I've tried using auto generated subs and every time I turned them off within a minute because so much of it is nonsense. Last time was about a month ago.
It seemed to get a lot of simple sentences right but every few it completely misparsed. Additionally, it seemed like every uncommon name or technical term became something else.
In light of your comment I went to YouTube to evaluate it again and... it's a lot better than I remember! I watched a few minutes of a video analysing some music and everything, including music terms, was correct.
Seconded. The auto generated subtitles were basically useless until literally a matter of weeks ago, but there has clearly been some kind of massive advance.
The auto-generated subtitles still struggle with very strong regional accents, very poor sound quality or people talking over each other, but they're good enough for the vast majority of content. It doesn't seem to make dumb errors any more, just the kind of understandable errors you'd expect from a human stenographer.
Your estimate is way too optimistic. But also what it doesn't get is usually key subject content and what it does get is low hanging fruit guessable from context.
Sometimes I try subtitles on something I cannot understand (because English is my second language) and that has not helped ever, it's always gibberish.
I tried going subtitles only a few times and gave up because I have to rewind and turn on sound every few seconds.
For me YouTube captions/transcription have always been really bad, but whenever YouTube switched to some Whisper equivalent (or Whisper itself, ha) it has improved tremendously and rarely gets things wrong, in my own experience.
Maybe for american English, but put an accent in there, or even just British English and it goes down, fast. I'm currently watching Taskmaster on YouTube and every time it's not crystal clear audio with no background noice, it's closer to 50% miss
For English I only notice it miss technical words, confusing them for more common words. Regardless of accent.
For Russian, which I don't understand, the result is maybe 50% intelligible (particularly when technical jargon is probably involved). But 50% is still infinitely better than what I can do with Russian myself (0%).
50% intelligible is not infinitely better than 0% intelligible. In fact it could be that you're completely misled into believing something that's not true at all. Whereas if you are aware you understand 0% you're not jumping to these wild conclusions as confidently.
For context, I'm watching videos of a guy making jet engines in his garage. The consequence of being mislead is about zero. I'm not concerned about the 50% I miss. There are no wild conclusions being jumped to. If anybody jumps to any sort of wild conclusions on the basis of a 50% intelligible video, that's squarely on them.
Idk, my English is not great but apparently I am better than YouTube subs because when I need help understanding an English word it turns out YT can't transcribe it either :/
I used to use Facebook a lot. It knew me, always recommended stuff I'd be interested in and I sometimes spent hours on Facebook and not even realizing it, only after I finished and then I'd feel guilty about it. The same shit next day.
I quit all social media 3 years ago. I don't visit them daily anymore. I visit Facebook only with a purpose to check something specific when I need it in one of the groups (in my country reddit or Twitter is not popular, we have Facebook groups for everything) and I almost never check the feed. When I do I realize I changed so much in those three years Facebook no longer knows me and the stuff it recommends is not interesting anymore.
I don't miss any of it. Yeah, sometimes I don't get what colleagues are talking about, but it's not important. I have more time on my hands to do anything else.
How do you think then? I have two modes:
1. Conscious thinking with words, when I am actively trying to think about something, when I'm trying to solve a problem.
2. And unconscious thinking where I don't actively think about the problem and do something else, but after a while I come to some conclusion.
But when I am trying to actively think of something I know no other way than to think in words. I am not a visual thinker (I'm kind of aphantasic, when you ask me to think about a horse, only an idea pops up in my head without any specific image and I have to try really hard and describe the horse with words to make some kind of misty parts of the horse).
Back in the day when I was thinking about this I kind of thought of myself as pre-visual. I'm sure I have multiple modes of thought though, and I'm also sure this is true of pretty much everyone.
I've had way too many instances of not being able to find a word to express an idea, or not remembering the specific words people expressed but just what I think was the gist of what they said (whether or not I interpreted them correctly) to think of myself as a verbal thinker. When it comes to word production sometimes they just come, at other times it takes me time, and I can go into a state where they just flow, but in that state my conscious is checked out of the process. It has the experience of an autonomic process almost.
I do have an inner monologue though (frequently caught up with OCD counting, or at the moment Taylor Swift's Anti-Hero song as well as speaking the words I am writing as I am writing them).
> only an idea pops up in my head without any specific image and I have to try really hard and describe the horse with words to make some kind of misty parts of the horse
Is this idea the words which describe the horse, or a pre-visual/pre-verbal idea of a horse?
I actually just yesterday attended my first ever event from Meetup (it was not paid) and I met a lot of interesting people and had good conversations. So I'd say to OP to give it a chance if they find something interesting there.
Look up Syncthing. I have it running on my phone and computer and I have near real-time updates of the gallery. I can even delete and add photos from PC to phone. (It's not limited to the gallery of course)
Now that you mention it, I vaguely remember something like a pop-up window pop up, but I so automatically closed it I didn't even remember there was one!
Au is only slightly smaller than the USA with 25.7 million people vs just California’s 39.24 and the Netherlands have 17.53 million — but bear in mind Australia is 186 times the size of the NDs. So it’s not surprising service is so good — the density of population makes broadband extremely profitable.
People forget. The numbers tell a really great story.
Yes, absolutely true. I think there’s something like 8M people just in NSW and the majority are Sydney.
Only trying to provide context for the economics of density in places like Singapore and the a Netherlands, not necessarily prove the opposite use case. I just wanted to highlight a contrasting factor that is very important for fiber and other high speed service viability. There are many others!
