It's almost as if every country of note is running massive internet surveillance programs, is aware of everybody else's program, and is only using the leaks as an excuse to publicly complain about something everyone knows everyone else is doing.

Nah, that would just be paranoid.

I have talked to VCs a number of times. Always wound up finding other funding in the end, but got a lot of perspective on what VCs are looking for and how they anticipate getting it.

Number one: a VC expects 5x-10x return on investment. That return is typically from selling to another company (which may itself be a VC). It may also be from revenue but VCs these days are less interested in active revenue. They want to sell the company and move on.
Number two: They don't care so much about the actual technology. It's important to have good demos etc, but it's kind of a tertiary concern. VCs are investing, first and foremost, in people who they think will get it done. Not just on the tech side, but on the business side.
Number three: The more you talk about the tech's details, the worse it gets. Focus on why this makes sense to consumers at a high level. Focus on why YOU are special. Not the algorithm. YOU.
Number four: It is enormously helpful to have important industry people to vouch for you. Find filmmakers or producers or somebody who are successful with recognized achievements, and have them write mini-recommendations for the tech.

As engineers, it is very tempting to try and explain to a VC why your algorithm is so much more clever than what's out there. Do not bother. That's not what capital is about.

In all seriousness, it is nice to see that a perfectly normal looking woman (ie not "ugly" or "manly" as is often the norm for acceptability into male-dominated circles) is also a brilliant hacker and presumably successful businesswoman. Wait, not nice -- fantastic. Amazing. Wonderful.

I'm doing DSLR video work, and my camera is recording 700 MB of data per minute. (Hacked GH2 at high bitrates. Ouch!) Still not sure how I want to deal with the massive amount of data coming in, most of which is trashed in edit.

Your point is good, but your mistake was quoting Ken Rockwell.

That's going to be one really, really big Kickstarter project.

They totally could. If you bought a two mile span of it.

This is coming from a man who put together A New Hope on a shoestring budget fighting against all the odds. Now he can't put together a decent TV show at a decent budget? Come on. People don't watch Star Wars for the insane production values.

Spoke too soon, the paper has an hq4x comparison. The results are really, really good -- it actually manages to do a better job than hq4x on Super Mario World.

You can't understand the difference between SCALING and VECTORIZING? Really? Scaling algorithms increase the number of pixels, but you're fundamentally still dealing with a raster image. A vectorized drawing is a whole different beast.

That said, I would like to compare the final results against a best of breed scalar like hq4x for the same final output resolution.

As someone who is heavily involved in the Microsoft world -- does anyone care? Seriously, I did some great work with VB6 back in the day, but it was already struggling for any vague relevance by 2003. What possible appeal does the source code hold, apart from historical curiosity and amusement at what is probably a hilarious codebase? This doesn't help any Microsoft-houses, who have long since been forced to bail on VB6 -- and the stragglers are technical incompetents who can't get anything out of this.

In 2003, I could see how this would've been supremely useful (if arguably dangerous in any number of ways). Now, it just doesn't make any sense at all.

It's a matter of unnecessary Slashdot editorializing, promotion of stupid viewpoints by stupid people. Free Software, amongst other things, exists to promote choice amongst developers and users both. So why is losing effective development choices productive? It isn't. But because there's a vague connection to Microsoft here, it must be evil and be destroyed. Especially now with Java in Oracle hands, what does this accomplish? It's like these people never got out of college and think their professors' dedication to C and a UNIX variant is the only legitimate viewpoint.

It's popular to talk about why 'unlocked' phones, but I would wager that the vast majority of unlocked phone buyers do not care that the phone is unlocked. It's irrelevant. We're not planning to switch networks. It's the contract that is the problem. Locked phones are fine as long as they're off contract. And off contract is exactly where cell companies don't want their customers to be.

Funny how the miraculous solution to every problem anyone has with Linux is always just about to go in with the next version. Sure the current one sucks, but we promise the next one is totally different! Sigh.

He was at our graduation ceremony this past May (Hopkins 10) getting an honorary degree, in fact.