Yep. 260ms for an old guy like me. Just tested it here: https://f1-start.glitch.me
-
-
-
Pretty much shows these timings can't be generalized at all.. Literally my 2nd try while being very tired..pic.twitter.com/AYtSm5xzQC
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
I’m guessing there must be some concurrency and escapes not shown? Or does this just happen when you’re 40?
-
What it’s not shown is that the brain is a prediction machine. It continuously generate the future and check whether it matches the sensory input. What you perceive is its predictive generative model (when it matches..), not the ‘nude’ stimuli.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Without a doubt
@ID_AA_Carmack could speed this up. :)Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Note that this is for conscious reaction times. Unconscious reactions can be faster as they short circuit parts of this and get processed by the spinal cord.
-
However it's still one of my favorite facts that humans go through life essentially hallucinating all of their concious visual perceptions with the brain verifying its predictions afterward, conveniently forgetting when it gets it wrong.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Some years ago a few of us debated the relationship between proprioception latency and the size of a baseball field or soccer penalty pitch. http://nickporcino.com/meshula-net-archive/posts/post109.html …
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
So human cannot handle VR at 90FPS?
-
Latency is not exactly related to FPS tho, human eyes sensitivity is hard to measure, pretty sure some people can even see differences well above 220+ FPS. Not a easy topic but actually 90 FPS is pretty low :)
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.