h a l f b a k e r yIt's as much a hovercraft as a pancake is a waffle.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
An electronic device which is attached to the hair/skin on the back of the head (nothing too permenant, just strong enough that you don't have to worry about it falling off), so as to maximize visibility for onlookers. To those around, it would appear to be the owner's third eye, conveniently located
almost 180 degrees from the other two.
Now this could by a high tech front for a camera which is connected by bluetooth to a video-mobile phone or a palm top PC, allowing the wearer to view and control the eye. However, it isn't.
In fact the wearer cannot actually see out of this "eye". The electronics are simply there so that the attached eyelid occasionally blinks and that the pupil part of the eye routinely changes direction, to add to the realistic effect.
The intention of this is purely psychological. Children in a class room wouldn't dare to try and mess around if they think their teacher can see them, even with his back turned. And why would a mugger try to sneak up on someone who, as far as he can tell, is already watching him?
Of course if this became very popular, the effect would be ruined and people would probably be forced to resort to the high tech version.
No need to settle for the appearance of vision
ReVisions_99
[theircompetitor, Oct 01 2005]
[link]
|
| |
I saw a newspaper article in which someone with no eyesight have an electronic device connected via his tongue; at first he saw vague flashes of light and dark, and gradually he became fully able to see with this device. The human brain is very capable of decoding all kinds of input, so perhaps you could have a (more permanent) version of this. |
|
| |
oh, i'm really looking forward to that, backwards, whatever |
|
| |
Huh. You're right about when this became popular -- I suggest that there always be versions with vision and versions without vision and no observer able to tell whcih was which. It would be best if the wearer never gave away which sort of rear vision device she wore - a rear-vision wearer would be indistinguishable from a non-viewing wearer. Much like never condescending to letting anyone know that you overheard their snide remark. Or didn't. |
|
| |
oh, it's easy to tell which is which by trying to steal the device itself from someone. if you make it, then it's a replica. |
|
| |