Talk:OpenCV
![]() | Robotics Start‑class Mid‑importance | |||||||||
|
![]() | Computing Start‑class | |||||||||
|
Discussion about the content
I want to open a discussion here about a thing. I have modified the page with two references to ndOpenCV (OpenCV for Nanodesktop PSP). Your user femmina has erased my references. I would a debate and a votation about these references, because I believe that it is an important work and that it merits to be cited in Wikipedia. I've restored the changes in way that it is possible to see how the page appeared. Thanks for your attention.
[For the webmasters: if I've written in the wrong section, please excuse me and correct my message] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.18.173.152 (talk) 19:42, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
The rest of the discussion he already had with me is here [1] at the end of my talk page. There are various problems with the above user "contribution". Mainly lack of any citation or reference for the "successful application" and the inability of his customized version of the library to run on any standard device on the market (Sony PSPs can only run signed binaries). I think that maybe a link to his work could be placed in PSP homebrew rather than in this page. -- Femmina (talk) 21:09, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
- If you want a reference to a successful application that uses this porting, it's simple: Blind Assistant is one of the software that uses it. Another is CamShift demo. The reference is useful here for this simple reason: the reseachers that look for a way to run OpenCV on a cheap and embedded device, search in Wikipedia the word OpenCV and so they have notice of the existence of this porting for the PSP. If we put the reference in the homebrew voice, the researchers in the universities that are looking for a way of execution under an embedded device cannot see the reference and so it is unuseful. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.18.173.152 (talk) 22:05, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
- Researchers in the universities should not bother to hack their PSPs to do something that can be done legally with a PC104, a Mini itx or any other industrial PC for the same price or less. What 87.18.173.152 is trying to advertise here is silly. -- Femmina (talk) 04:06, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
- It is pointless (and lack of any sense, and demential). Does the voice go to wikipedia only if Femmina retains that the project is good for her ? For example, an user application like Blind Assistant cannot be realized using a PC-104. Because PC-104 hasn't an incorporated display. And after all, one thing is to use a commercial device, that someone can buy anywhere, and a different thing is to use an industrial device, that can be bought only in particular companies and that has a difficult reperibility. But the real point of the question is that a voice can be deleted if it is false. You are saying, instead, that the voice must like to the moderator. Since femmina retains that the porting is useless (and it is only her opinion, and absolutely WRONG), the reference must be erased. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.10.173.74 (talk) 06:49, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
- Well, I have problems understanding your english and your intentions, so maybe let's just wait a bit and see what other people opinions on this subject are. Display modules are available for PC104s but why you need an high resolution color display for a device that is supposed to help blind people? Also, I don't like your personal attacks. -- Femmina (talk) 07:46, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
- When you want to distribute your free application (because all software that we're telling about is free), can you say to the blind: "buy an industrial device, buy a display, buy a cabinet, program its firmware..." ? It's lack of sense. The concept of a porting of the OpenCV libraries, that uses the power of the VFPU of a console to speed up the computations and that runs on a commercial device, available anywhere, IS an advantage. This isn't a useless porting, you're wrong.
A QUESTION: Femmina, VCRT is officially supported by OpenCv team, isn't it ?
- So what? - Femmina (talk) 20:54, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
- Have you said that ndOpenCV hasn't to be cited because the PSP version isn't officially supported by Intel ? Well, neither Mac OS X nor VCRT version are supported by Intel, but, for any strange reason, you tolerate them in the page. Have you said that the ndOpenCV applications require signed binaries (but this what changes for Wikipedia goals?): well, the version for VCRT is for embedded and proprietary platform only, so you cannot create your application on this platform (only the producer of the camera can). But, for any absurd reason, VCRT is cited and Nanodesktop isn't. The truth is that you are climbing on the mirrors because you've decided that ndOpenCV hasn't to be cited, but you haven't any believable technical or logical reason to justify this. In this way, you damage the efforts of the italian developers that are involved in this project and that have worked for 2 years on this. The annoying thing is that your decision is simply arbitrary. You are the only member that is creating all these troubles: in this discussion nobody has created troubles or has written to tell his position. At this point, I don't care the demential justifications of your **arbitrary** decision, like that OpenCV can be used without HighGUI (ROFTL) or that I can use an industrial device like PC-107 (ROFTL again). I repeat you: this is only a "climbing on the mirror". At this point, write your page with the contents that you've decided: it is clear that you've become the owner of the page....
- I've said that your software won't run on any commercially available device as it requires an illegal and risky modification to be performed on the PSP in order to run. Moreover, your project is utterly non-notable and what you're really trying to accomplish here is self promotion. Oh, and you're rude, some of the technical details you cite are false and most of the things you say don't make any sense. - Femmina (talk) 03:11, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
- It is illegal only in your head. And, in any case, the manifest of Wikipedia doesn't say that a project is cited only if it likes to Femmina or if Femmina retains that it can be useful (in her, very very limited, opinion). I believe that the page is public and doesn't own to Femmina. I don't understand why VCRT porting must be cited and why Nanodesktop isn't. I note you that you are the ONLY member that is creating these troubles for a citation of FIVE WORDS, the others have accepted tacitly the thing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.6.15.108 (talk) 14:33, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
- I've said that your software won't run on any commercially available device as it requires an illegal and risky modification to be performed on the PSP in order to run. Moreover, your project is utterly non-notable and what you're really trying to accomplish here is self promotion. Oh, and you're rude, some of the technical details you cite are false and most of the things you say don't make any sense. - Femmina (talk) 03:11, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
- Have you said that ndOpenCV hasn't to be cited because the PSP version isn't officially supported by Intel ? Well, neither Mac OS X nor VCRT version are supported by Intel, but, for any strange reason, you tolerate them in the page. Have you said that the ndOpenCV applications require signed binaries (but this what changes for Wikipedia goals?): well, the version for VCRT is for embedded and proprietary platform only, so you cannot create your application on this platform (only the producer of the camera can). But, for any absurd reason, VCRT is cited and Nanodesktop isn't. The truth is that you are climbing on the mirrors because you've decided that ndOpenCV hasn't to be cited, but you haven't any believable technical or logical reason to justify this. In this way, you damage the efforts of the italian developers that are involved in this project and that have worked for 2 years on this. The annoying thing is that your decision is simply arbitrary. You are the only member that is creating all these troubles: in this discussion nobody has created troubles or has written to tell his position. At this point, I don't care the demential justifications of your **arbitrary** decision, like that OpenCV can be used without HighGUI (ROFTL) or that I can use an industrial device like PC-107 (ROFTL again). I repeat you: this is only a "climbing on the mirror". At this point, write your page with the contents that you've decided: it is clear that you've become the owner of the page....
Slightly Off topic : PSPs with firmware 1.50 allow this PSP application to run according to the project documentation. PSPs with firmware 1.50 have been made commercially and legally available by Sony themselves a few years ago. I'd like Femmina to give their source of information when they say it is illegal and risky to buy a product officially sold for months by the original maker. Back on topic, I don't see why the project wouldn't be added at least in the links section, or "successful applications" section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.171.180.101 (talk) 01:17, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
- Only the old PSP "fat" can run the 1.50 kernel and you still need to use the "%" exploit, which messes up the memory card as a side effect. The "fat" model is out of production. -- Femmina (talk) 15:11, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
- What are you talking about "messing up" the memory card? Its just a folder. If you are referring to the additional icon of the extra folder in the Game menu, then that can be avoided by adding "__SCE__" to the folder name.122.164.9.139 (talk) 18:46, 27 November 2008 (UTC)