 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 20/02/14 17:07, andrel wrote:
>
> What makes you think they have not already done that?
>
>
We are all in the Matrix
John
--
Protect the Earth
It was not given to you by your parents
You hold it in trust for your children
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 02/20/2014 12:53 PM, Doctor John wrote:
> On 20/02/14 17:07, andrel wrote:
>>
>> What makes you think they have not already done that?
>>
>>
>
> We are all in the Matrix
or maybe ... we're a virus in someones petri dish
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
James Holsenback <nom### [at] none com> wrote:
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-26258971
>
> OK cool tech at work here ... lot's of engineering reasons why this is a
> great idea, but for some reason I don't like it one bit!
>
When I first saw this (and the photo of what the cabin would look like), I
thought the same thing: When will 'virtual' reality ever stop?! But I have to
admit that the idea of a hi-def, ultra-wide 'fake window' (as opposed to the
small and scratchy windows currently found on airline planes) would be really
cool. I don't fly much-- but when I do, I always like to sit near a window. Yet
I usually get a stiff neck from having to crank my neck sideways trying to peer
outside (or else I end up sitting over the wing, which is no fun.) Seeing
real-time imagery of the outside environment would be thrilling! Of course, the
addition of 3-D glasses would make it more immersive... (Hmm, no need for even
the fake window, in that case-- just wear a wide-angle hi-def headset, with
Dolby surround-sound of the engines roaring!)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> They recently got that monkey to control the limbs of another sedated
>> monkey remotely, next you could connect the output of an eye in one
>> person to the optic nerve of another, then after that there's nothing to
>> stop a computer or camera being used to inject signals directly onto the
>> optic nerve - no need for a screen ever again!
>
> What makes you think they have not already done that?
Only because I haven't heard or read anything about it, but of course
that doesn't mean it hasn't been done. I imagine one of the main drivers
would be to help people see again who have lost their sight.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> (Hmm, no need for even
> the fake window, in that case-- just wear a wide-angle hi-def headset, with
> Dolby surround-sound of the engines roaring!)
The Oculus Rift will take over everywhere!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 21/02/2014 08:57, scott a écrit :
>> (Hmm, no need for even
>> the fake window, in that case-- just wear a wide-angle hi-def headset,
>> with
>> Dolby surround-sound of the engines roaring!)
>
> The Oculus Rift will take over everywhere!
>
The Oculus Rift is for the "poor" people.
Really rich ones do not want to be bother with wearing Oculus Rift. The
plane is the Oculus Rift.
Btw, that plane is just more than 40 years old in conception: the
Concorde was initially planed to be without windows (for better
resilience) but the decision was changed due to psychological discomfort
(no flat lcd widescreen at that time).
planned Mach 1.6 when Concorde went Mach 2... seems someone has just
traded speed for range (Concorde was a bit short by today standard. Only
viable exploitation was New-york --(Paris/London), unable to go
further... not even Chicago)
--
Just because nobody complains does not mean all parachutes are perfect.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>>> They recently got that monkey to control the limbs of another sedated
>>> monkey remotely, next you could connect the output of an eye in one
>>> person to the optic nerve of another, then after that there's nothing to
>>> stop a computer or camera being used to inject signals directly onto the
>>> optic nerve - no need for a screen ever again!
>>
>> What makes you think they have not already done that?
>
> Only because I haven't heard or read anything about it, but of course
> that doesn't mean it hasn't been done. I imagine one of the main drivers
> would be to help people see again who have lost their sight.
>
The other main driver of course, is to have someone sitting comfortably
in Langley, Virginia be able to "see" through the eyes of a drone flying
over Damascus or Pyongyang. but that one we won't hear about for a few
years.
--
/*Francois Labreque*/#local a=x+y;#local b=x+a;#local c=a+b;#macro P(F//
/* flabreque */L)polygon{5,F,F+z,L+z,L,F pigment{rgb 9}}#end union
/* @ */{P(0,a)P(a,b)P(b,c)P(2*a,2*b)P(2*b,b+c)P(b+c,<2,3>)
/* gmail.com */}camera{orthographic location<6,1.25,-6>look_at a }
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>>> What makes you think they have not already done that?
>>
>> Only because I haven't heard or read anything about it, but of course
>> that doesn't mean it hasn't been done. I imagine one of the main drivers
>> would be to help people see again who have lost their sight.
>>
> The other main driver of course, is to have someone sitting comfortably
> in Langley, Virginia be able to "see" through the eyes of a drone flying
> over Damascus or Pyongyang. but that one we won't hear about for a few
> years.
Surely a TV screen is way, *way* cheaper then nerve implant surgery?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 21/02/2014 07:55 AM, scott wrote:
>>> They recently got that monkey to control the limbs of another sedated
>>> monkey remotely, next you could connect the output of an eye in one
>>> person to the optic nerve of another, then after that there's nothing to
>>> stop a computer or camera being used to inject signals directly onto the
>>> optic nerve - no need for a screen ever again!
>>
>> What makes you think they have not already done that?
>
> Only because I haven't heard or read anything about it, but of course
> that doesn't mean it hasn't been done. I imagine one of the main drivers
> would be to help people see again who have lost their sight.
I know audio nerve stimulation is a real thing that they've actually
tried to do. Of course, it's hard to tell how well it actually works...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 21/02/2014 3:42 AM, Kenneth wrote:
> I don't fly much-- but when I do, I always like to sit near a window.
Whereas I do fly a lot and I prefer to sit by the aisle. ;-)
But that might be because I hate flying and wouldn't want to look out of
the window @ any price.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
