Sign in or 

|
Shadoware |
20. RE: T-1000 HUD?
Nov 7 2008, 3:00 PM EST
I think T-1000 would be something beyond imagination!But why the guys made the hud in other terminators so diferent from the movie? Some patent problem? Skynet could process them! lol Do you find this valuable? |
|
Chi3000 |
21. RE: T-1000 HUD?
Nov 7 2008, 3:45 PM EST
"I'm a computer programmer for a living. All the things you mentioned can be (and are) accomplished through things like object oriented programming. Data is passed from various modules through functioned calls and via memory locations and CPU registers. At no point does it become efficient for that information to be rendered into a visual state that must be taken BACK into the CPU (presumably using some form of OCR). It's simply inefficient."What is your opinion on the nanobot theory? Could that be a possibility based on computing laws and parameters in the real world? Do you find this valuable? |
|
Neilis |
22. RE: T-1000 HUD?
Nov 7 2008, 3:55 PM EST
"What is your opinion on the nanobot theory? Could that be a possibility based on computing laws and parameters in the real world?"Seems plausible enough. I actually saw a demo video of something somewhat similar a while back. It was a collection of individual robots that were effectively small cubes (around 3-4" per side). They joined together to make a larger robot (that admittedly didn't do much on it's own, but this was a concept demo). If you walked up to it though and kicked it apart, the little cubes would slowly crawl back to each other and reassemble. It also opens the door as to how the nanobots would communicate. In this demo, they did so wirelessly. Given that we've seen a T-1000 rejoin from many pieces that were not physically in contact, I'd suspect that some form of wireless/radio communication would need to be used too. If that's the case it does leave the door open to reprogramming, or possibly disabling, of T-1000's through wirelessly hacking into them :). Do you find this valuable? |
|
DeusEx |
23. RE: T-1000 HUD?
Nov 7 2008, 4:09 PM EST
"Ok, seriously, the role play is awesome and all that, but we're in the real world, and we're discussing the real world technical merits of a fictional device.its complex now for you and your inferior technology, but for me, programming my Terminators, here in the future, its really child's play. Just bear in mind, we (oops, I mean they) already understand english as part of our infiltrator duties. We can translate into english naturally enough to fool humans. I mean, those terminaters can. It only seems difficult because you guys in 2008 havent developed english comprehension yet, so it comes under the category of "Problem, hard". My terminators can also learn Armenian in a couple of hours. Do you find this valuable? |
|
Chi3000 |
24. RE: T-1000 HUD?
Nov 7 2008, 4:21 PM EST
"Seems plausible enough. I actually saw a demo video of something somewhat similar a while back. It was a collection of individual robots that were effectively small cubes (around 3-4" per side). They joined together to make a larger robot (that admittedly didn't do much on it's own, but this was a concept demo). If you walked up to it though and kicked it apart, the little cubes would slowly crawl back to each other and reassemble.People have been wondering how they would be able to stop Catherine without luring her into a smelting station lol. Could be as simple as a jamming device. Turning her into a pile of micro BB's. If a T1000 is actaully nano's. Cool stuff. I always like hearing people in your kind of fields talking sci fi Do you find this valuable? |
|
DeusEx |
25. RE: T-1000 HUD?
Nov 7 2008, 4:26 PM EST
A strong emp discharge could do the trick. Also, the liquid nitrogen would have worked if they hadnt been standing right next to a smelter! An extremely strong magnetic field might also do the trick. Do you find this valuable? |
|
Neilis |
26. RE: T-1000 HUD?
Nov 7 2008, 4:48 PM EST
"its complex now for you and your inferior technology, but for me, programming my Terminators, here in the future, its really child's play. Just bear in mind, we (oops, I mean they) already understand english as part of our infiltrator duties. We can translate into english naturally enough to fool humans. I mean, those terminaters can.Are you familiar with the concept of a Von Neumann machine? Simply put, its a very simple concept of a computer that can solve any program that can be programatically solved, when solution TIME is unimportant, and assuming sufficient storage space to hold the program. Every computer built within the modern age can be used to implement/emulate a Von Neumann machine, and hence every problem that is programatically solveable CAN be solved on any computer that you wish to use. So, with that in mind, computers improve because a) they become faster, allowing us to do things in a reasonable ammount of time that once would have taken too long, b) because the limitation of storage space goes up, allowing for longer (but inherently more complex) programs to be executed, and c) because of innovations in software allowing us to do new and creative things. C usually ties into A though. So, with that in mind, you have to understand that an operation that is complex on one computer, will continue to be complex regardless of how fast or advanced they become. They may reach a point at which a problem of that complexity can be executed within an acceptable amount of time, but from an efficiency standpoint, the solution will always be more complex (and require more resources) than a solution that was previously less complex. It's like your little brother trying to become older than you. No matter how old you both get, he'll always be younger. Given that, optically rendering data to a virtual screen, simply to be recognized and reintegrated back into the system, would be more complex than avoiding that step and keeping the data in an accessible area of memory.. No matter how advanced the technology, it is an inefficient step that is completely needless, and would serve absolutely no purpose on a real machine that had no need to submit to human control. Do you find this valuable? |
|
snoopdeeyodubballgee |
27. RE: T-1000 HUD?
May 28 2009, 7:21 AM EDT
| Post edited: May 28 2009, 7:32 AM EDT
how do i remove this post? lol
Do you find this valuable?
|
|
T-900_Infiltrator |
28. RE: T-1000 HUD?
May 28 2009, 11:07 AM EDT
| Post edited: May 28 2009, 11:10 AM EDT
According to the T2 novel, the T-1000 does not have a HUD. It also has no chronometer (time clock). It thinks and operates in a completely different way from previous Terminators like the T-800. Its neural net is much more like that of an organic being. You could say the T-1000 is a living machine. An artificial form of life.EDIT: Oh geez, I just noticed the original post date of this thread. LOL. Talk about a necromancy bump. But it seemed as if no one really answered the question, so there you go. Do you find this valuable? |