Unlimited Detail Technology

[GSquadron]

@Aleksander Dishnica: Either I'm not understanding you at all, or you're saying we're stupid. I really hope it isn't the latter because that would be very narrow minded, and against the rules.

No man! I didn't even read what you wrote, because there were a lot of replies, i am just saying that the technology is stupid because it cannot be done.

 

[qubit]

Fair enough Ben & qubit, fair enough.
I'll leave it to the maker to defend. I directed him to this thread (via email) to have a look at what you guys have to say and decide how open he wants to be with this thing. I can not dispute that it's authenticity is in question because of the very nature of the claim. Let's watch and see.
Here's hoping it hasn't been a colossal waste of effort.

EDIT: depending on his response, I will dump the petition if I see no proof myself.

Two days later and the silence from our Mr Dell is deafening, isn't it?

With annoying skeptics like myself and Benetanegia around and calling him out in no uncertain terms, you'd think he'd be dead keen to prove us all wrong, wouldn't you? In fact, any honest person with a fantastic new invention would be profoundly irritated by us and feel compelled to do so. But not our Mr Dell the charlatan. No, of course not.

Oh yeah, someone pointed out on here that there had been no new developments for two years. Two whole years? Shit, that's a fucking century in computer graphics!

Remember, elusiveness in backing up claims is a primary hallmark of the conman. It's always frustratingly just around the fucking corner, isn't it?

Finally, that name "Dell" is a bit suspicious don't you think? The same name as that of the successful computer company? Sure, there are other people in this world with that name, but it's not a very common name and the coincidence is a little too convenient methinks. Pehaps it helps his cause to extract money from marks, sorry, "investors" if they confuse him a little bit with the other big, successful Dell, no?

c'mon, how much proof do you need?!

 

[Mussels]

If he is reading this: official reps are welcome here, so long as you dont do any advertising. Staff will make sure you dont get unfairly attacked, and have every chance to explain your product(s) in detail.

 

[Thatguy]

Two days later and the silence from our Mr Dell is deafening, isn't it?

With annoying skeptics like myself and Benetanegia around and calling him out in no uncertain terms, you'd think he'd be dead keen to prove us all wrong, wouldn't you? In fact, any honest person with a fantastic new invention would be profoundly irritated by us and feel compelled to do so. But not our Mr Dell the charlatan. No, of course not.

Oh yeah, someone pointed out on here that there had been no new developments for two years. Two whole years? Shit, that's a fucking century in computer graphics!

Remember, elusiveness in backing up claims is a primary hallmark of the conman. It's always frustratingly just around the fucking corner, isn't it?

Finally, that name "Dell" is a bit suspicious don't you think? The same name as that of the successful computer company? Sure, there are other people in this world with that name, but it's not a very common name and the coincidence is a little too convenient methinks. Pehaps it helps his cause to extract money from marks, sorry, "investors" if they confuse him a little bit with the other big, successful Dell, no?

c'mon, how much proof do you need?!

Honestly, I have absolutely no idea who you are, in fact I'd never seen your screen name before today.

I am not seeing your relevance to the technology being discussed ?

Who are you again ?




















BTW thats why your not getting a response.

 

[crazyeyesreaper]

to be honest Thatguy qubit has made more decent contributions to the forum in general then ive seen you give so i could use the same asshole logic as well

point is this tech isnt gonna go anywhere hell awesome u can render a 320x240 image with a crapload of geometry awesome thats fantastic its also super nes resolution so im hardly impressed.

I need actually demos that show what there trying to do in realtime show me video footage of something working at 1280x720 at the very least because on a 4ghz quad core with a scene around 2million polygons the kind of rendering method Mr Dell is some how optimizing to run in real time takes my rig 9-15mins to render per frame. So i find it to be bollocks till we get something... Hell even onlive with there game service crap had demos showing what it was capable of back when they first started push there ideas. Seems UDT has some low res shots of a creature. It dosent look good it dosent even remotely seem like its UDT. It looks to be nothing more then a fairly low resolution render or still frame that proves nothing of there technology i could render something and claim i did it with UDT dosent mean i did.

 

[qubit]

Honestly, I have absolutely no idea who you are, in fact I'd never seen your screen name before today.

I am not seeing your relevance to the technology being discussed ?

Who are you again ?




















BTW thats why your not getting a response.

WTF? What's so hard to understand? Try reading my previous posts on this thread, too. :shadedshu

There is no "technology" here, only a con.

to be honest Thatguy qubit has made more decent contributions to the forum in general then ive seen you give so i could use the same asshole logic as well

Thanks crazy. I've just seen your post.

You make some very good points in the rest of your post as well. Yeah, let's see a high res animation in "infinite" detail. I'd really like to see that...

Honestly, the more one looks at this UD thing, the more shot through full of holes it becomes. It's an unfortunate fact of life that conmen will move into every walk of life, even a high tech one like computer technology, where you'd think people would be more clued up not to fall for rubbish like this.

 

[Mussels]

Honestly, I have absolutely no idea who you are, in fact I'd never seen your screen name before today.

I am not seeing your relevance to the technology being discussed ?

Who are you again ?



BTW thats why your not getting a response.

Qubit has been on this forum for spot on 3 years now, so actually... his name is pretty well known around here.

As opposed to you, who has only been here a little over a month... of course you havent seen his name. you've barely had time to scratch the surface of the forums.

 

[newconroer]

Qubit has been on this forum for spot on 3 years now, so actually... his name is pretty well known around here.

As opposed to you, who has only been here a little over a month... of course you havent seen his name. you've barely had time to scratch the surface of the forums.

Excuse you?

Please stop making perfect examples of why upper members of TPU have gotten way out of line in the past five years.
Your post count dictates nothing, nor does the color of your name.



As for Unlimited Point Cloud Data and UDL...I am with Benetanegia for the most part.

Additionally, I don't completely disbelieve it, nor do I think it's impossible, NOR do I think that there's some big conspiracy by the Top Guns, to keep a monopoly on the graphics industry.

I welcomed the concept, but without any consistent representative body, it makes it difficult to find it realistic. Though I could say the same thing about real time vector drawing and real time ray tracing in full 3d environments for the home user... ATi talks about it, but really, nothing's happening.

It becomes even more confusing and inconsistent, when one considers that what software developers have in mind, is limited by what hardware designers have in mind. Since UDL suggests it's capable of running under software power, then that point is moot - but I understand why that makes it seem so much more unlikely.

Regardless, some of the dissent in this thread has gotten out of hand, and is very reminiscent of the unnecessary 'fan boy-ism' that permeates throughout certain areas of TPU, like the Graphics sub-forum or the Games forum, when the moderators are too busy padding their clique, that they can't recognize when someone puts up another Infinity Ward versus Activision(or Treyarch) flame thread.

Really, agree or disagree, but grow up.

 

[qubit]

Excuse you?

Please stop making perfect examples of why upper members of TPU have gotten way out of line in the past five years.
Your post count dictates nothing, nor does the color of your name.

Hey buddy, did you even bother to read my posts before casting aspersions my way? You're also making some pretty nasty and unfounded accusations about the mods here. :shadedshu

Claims of "infinite" performance - especially without qualifiers - definitely makes for a scam. Along with all the other stuff that's wrong with this, it doesn't take much to see this for what it is.

Just read all my posts with an open mind and you'll hopefully see where I'm coming from.

In fact, read Benetanegia's and crazy's too. You'll see I'm not the only one that doesn't buy into this.

 

[pantherx12]

Qubit man, for it to be a con someone has to be conned.

Who is getting conned here? They state they have "plenty of money" on their damn website lol

So they're not trying to get money. Thus, not a con.



Basically to be a scam, or a con, someone has to loose out, are you loosing out? Are any companies you know loosing out? Have you heard about anyone loosing out?

If the answer is no, you can't call it a scam or con.

Maybe LIES and HAX but not a con.

Hey buddy, did you even bother to read my posts before casting aspersions my way? You're also making some pretty nasty and unfounded accusations about the mods here.
.

By the way, that's his opinion and I fully support his right to have that opinion, I find a few members and mods on here to be dickish ( won't throw names around as I'm not 5) but what's wrong with that?

Never met a policeman who's a bellend? lol

 

[qubit]

Qubit man, for it to be a con someone has to be conned.

Who is getting conned here? They state they have "plenty of money" on their damn website lol

So they're not trying to get money. Thus, not a con.

They might well have "plenty of money" from those "investors" they've duped. As I just said to newconroer, have another look at my posts and the others to see where we're coming from. I detest scammers, who are nothing more than fraudulent criminals and that's why I have the tone I do about this. I'm not having a go at you guys.

EDIT: I see you've edited your post while I was writing mine. Such is life. <sigh> It doesn't really change my message, however.

 

[BumbleBee]

anyways. BACK IN CANADA...

 

[pantherx12]

Google for reports of them scamming someone

After all they've been "scammers" for a few years now, where's all the reports and blog posts about the people that got ripped off?

.......... ..... yup, I'm finding them hard to find also.

They've also had the same name during all that time .... even their new site doesn't diassociate them from their unlimited detail brand ............... yet still no reports?

Either no one got scammed or the people that got scammed thought " Oh well, fair enough! let's not tell anyone so more people get scammed!"


Just think about it for a moment.


As I said feel free to call BS but if you want to excuse people of being criminals back it up eh dude.lol It's just not very nice

 

[Benetanegia]

Qubit man, for it to be a con someone has to be conned.

Who is getting conned here? They state they have "plenty of money" on their damn website lol

So they're not trying to get money. Thus, not a con.



Basically to be a scam, or a con, someone has to loose out, are you loosing out? Are any companies you know loosing out? Have you heard about anyone loosing out?

If the answer is no, you can't call it a scam or con.

Maybe LIES and HAX but not a con.

The fact that they say they have plenty of money is one of the posible hints at a scam. What's the very first thing that buskers (or beggars) do? Place some money of their own on the basket. I'm not comparing street musicians or poor people with scammers, it's just that the concept of money in the basket is the same. People just feel more compfortable giving out their money if somebody else did it before. A simple psychological trick.

Scammers always have all the money or almost all the money they need. It's just such a tiny ammount of your money that they need or that they could use. In fact, they don't really need it, but they are doing you a favor by letting you form part of such a good investment.

In that regards this looks a lot like this, it's just that I'm not as convinced as qubit (we could say that a part of me still wants to believe). But the signs are cetainly there. Maybe it turns out that the signs were a false alarm, but as of right now they are there. If it is a scam, everything they have posted would be the bait and we are not the prey, we are far too small, AMD is not the prey, they are far too big, but both us and AMD could form part of the bait and I simply don't want to. "Hey AMD seriously considered our tech, but because of... circunstances...","Our tech is praised all over the net...". NO, thanks.

Google for reports of them scamming someone

After all they've been "scammers" for a few years now, where's all the reports and blog posts about the people that got ripped off?

.......... ..... yup, I'm finding them hard to find also.

They've also had the same name during all that time .... even their new site doesn't diassociate them from their unlimited detail brand ............... yet still no reports?

Either no one got scammed or the people that got scammed thought " Oh well, fair enough! let's not tell anyone so more people get scammed!"


Just think about it for a moment.


As I said feel free to call BS but if you want to excuse people of being criminals back it up eh dude.lol It's just not very nice

Such is the internet. A fantastic place for scammers. Hypothetically speaking: 1 week of work and the bait is there, forever, awaiting the correct prey*. I'm not saying that it is a scamm, just how it would work. And some signs are there like I said.

*Just think about the scale of his claims. He is talking about bringing down companies like Nvidia or AMD with this technology. The "tiny" ammount of money that I talked about is obviously going to be huge for normal people like us, we are not the objective. But there's many people with lots of money and few brains, wanting to make some big bucks quickly that could byte, eventually, they just have to wait, like a fisherman would do.

 

[pantherx12]

XD

Funny about the buskers, in my town they do it the other way round, keep their hat empty so people think "awwww" and give them money.

Works as well!

I suppose it's fair enough for people to beleive what they want, I just feel it's a little harsh to call people criminals with no proof.

I'd be offended if someone called me a con artist that's for sure, and if they done it without a reason I'd probably be annoyed.

 

[entropy13]

What kind of beggars are you talking about Benetanegia? Might not be beggars at all, considering they have a basket in the first place.

 

[Over_Lord]

we are going offtopic

 

[pantherx12]

we are going offtopic

Now we're talking about unlimiteddetail the company.

 

[Mussels]

i gave money to a hot busker chick earlier today playing a violin.

why? she proved she could deliver the goods (and she WAS good, thought it was a recording at first)

 

[Benetanegia]

What kind of beggars are you talking about Benetanegia? Might not be beggars at all, considering they have a basket in the first place.

A punnet? English is not my first language.

I'm talking about the ones that ask for money on the streets. They are usually just lying on the floor all day long with a small basket and a carton where they ask for money. Some are true beggars others are not indeed. lol.

I saw a documentary about an anonymous one in Madrid, who was pretty much a scammer (depending on how loose your morals, in the end he just asked for money and people just gave it to him). He lived in a huge appartment in the most expensive street in Madrid.

Every morning, wearing an expensive suit and a briefcase, he went to a train station where he had rented a locker, inside he had a bag with a beggar costume, so he would go to the services and put them on. In the briefcase he had a basket and the message. After putting everything else on the locker, then he'd just go to the busiest street in Madrid, and lay down in some misery inspiring pose for a period of time, a workday, with breaks for luch and everything. He claimed to obtain 100-500 euros a day , depending on how lucky he had been, or how well he had represented his role.

It was not as simple as that actually, he talked about many variables, like how the economy was going on, important incidents that could change peoples perception or feelings (i.e. death of a celebrity, an earthquake) and a countless of other things he used to take into account in order to perform his role in the most efficient way posible. It was impressive actually.

Sorry because it was off-topic, but I just wanted to show how elaborate and patient scammers can be.

 

[qubit]

i gave money to a hot busker chick earlier today playing a violin.

why? she proved she could deliver the goods (and she WAS good, thought it was a recording at first)

Nah, it's cuz she wuz hot, obviously.

 

[remixedcat]

any luck contacting any of the companies???

 

[Thatguy]

to be honest Thatguy qubit has made more decent contributions to the forum in general then ive seen you give so i could use the same asshole logic as well.

Rightfully so,and none of us peons on these here messages boards really mean anything to a large company or a highly focused developer. We aren't individually as important as we'd often like to belive ourselves to be.

point is this tech isnt gonna go anywhere hell awesome u can render a 320x240 image with a crapload of geometry awesome thats fantastic its also super nes resolution so im hardly impressed.

well I talked about a method for creating full 1980x102 images in a storage format that would net a 300mb file for each image and how it was easily feasable. The issue becomes scalling and I don't disagree with you on this tennet of your argument.

I need actually demos that show what there trying to do in realtime show me video footage of something working at 1280x720 at the very least because on a 4ghz quad core with a scene around 2million polygons the kind of rendering method Mr Dell is some how optimizing to run in real time takes my rig 9-15mins to render per frame. So i find it to be bollocks till we get something... Hell even onlive with there game service crap had demos showing what it was capable of back when they first started push there ideas. Seems UDT has some low res shots of a creature. It dosent look good it dosent even remotely seem like its UDT. It looks to be nothing more then a fairly low resolution render or still frame that proves nothing of there technology i could render something and claim i did it with UDT dosent mean i did.

I myself would like some demos, but we all must admit that there are often betters ways to skin a cat. they have been headed in one direction for a long time based on older hardware like 500mb harddrives that were available at the dawn of PC gaming when DOS was a big deal.

So we do have alot of legacy thinking.

If you look below the surface of what Mr Dell is indicating " at least what I think he is indicating" you really don't need to render polygons if you have stored the information on the image. if each pixel on the screen has values, there is no real need for calculations to determine where they might be, all the image data "could be stored" in the image itself.This woudl dramaticlly lower the render time. the issue become reduction and increasing detail based on camera zoom, lighting models etc.

So its not exactly free, but it would reduce a great deal of overhead. It would increase and maybe decrease the work the developer has to do in several ways.

I was thinking about this the past few days. So procedurally, he might have something, but its not going to be the holy grail.

 

[Thatguy]

Qubit has been on this forum for spot on 3 years now, so actually... his name is pretty well known around here.

As opposed to you, who has only been here a little over a month... of course you havent seen his name. you've barely had time to scratch the surface of the forums.

Yes becuase hes as famous as Bill Gates or Steve Jobs. Being famous on a forum does not grant one credability elsewhere, nor does it guarentee name recognition.

 

[qubit]

Yes becuase hes as famous as Bill Gates or Steve Jobs. Being famous on a forum does not grant one credability elsewhere, nor does it guarentee name recognition.

You miss the point again, my friend. You made a big deal about who am I on this forum. Well, Mussels answered you. Quite nicely. And he's a mod...

I don't suppose you bothered to read my previous posts in this thread on this outfit like I suggested, did you? If you read them and try thinking critically and clearly for a moment, you'll see that what I'm saying is right. I'm not the only one saying it, either. Remember, it's not me or others like me that are your enemy, it's the bloody conman we're outing! This is a classic case of shooting the messenger.

Once again, out of all the many telltale signs, the smoking gun is the claim is to render infinite detail in real time. Absolutely impossible and total bollocks, as anyone with a little logical thinking can see. Remember, there was no qualifier with it, so it's not up to us to come up with what we think he said. Dell quite literally made an impossible claim - and it's sat unchanged on his website for ages. Let him fall by that.

Never mind, people get sucked in all the time and are usually in denial when it's pointed out to them, so this is nothing new. It won't be me or my skeptical friends, that's for sure.