<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_11_25_1316235</id>
	<title>Where Are Your Contact Lens Displays?</title>
	<author>CmdrTaco</author>
	<datestamp>1259157300000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>destinyland writes <i>"'We already see a future in which <a href="http://hplusmagazine.com/articles/toys-tools/micro-machines-and-opto-electronics-contact-lense">the humble contact lens becomes a real platform, like the iPhone is today,</a>' argues researcher Babak Parvis, 'with lots of developers contributing their ideas and inventions.'  He provides an update on the contact lens with transparent circuitry that's being developed at the University of Washington. (Its components will eventually include hundreds of LEDs which form images in front of the eye such as charts and photographs). They've already developed a lens-with-LED prototype that's powered by 330 microwatts of wireless radio-frequency power, and believe the lenses could also be used as biosensors to deliver body chemistry readings (including blood sugar levels). But 'What we've done so far barely hints at what will soon be possible with this technology,' says Dr. Parviz."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>destinyland writes " 'We already see a future in which the humble contact lens becomes a real platform , like the iPhone is today, ' argues researcher Babak Parvis , 'with lots of developers contributing their ideas and inventions .
' He provides an update on the contact lens with transparent circuitry that 's being developed at the University of Washington .
( Its components will eventually include hundreds of LEDs which form images in front of the eye such as charts and photographs ) .
They 've already developed a lens-with-LED prototype that 's powered by 330 microwatts of wireless radio-frequency power , and believe the lenses could also be used as biosensors to deliver body chemistry readings ( including blood sugar levels ) .
But 'What we 've done so far barely hints at what will soon be possible with this technology, ' says Dr .
Parviz. "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>destinyland writes "'We already see a future in which the humble contact lens becomes a real platform, like the iPhone is today,' argues researcher Babak Parvis, 'with lots of developers contributing their ideas and inventions.
'  He provides an update on the contact lens with transparent circuitry that's being developed at the University of Washington.
(Its components will eventually include hundreds of LEDs which form images in front of the eye such as charts and photographs).
They've already developed a lens-with-LED prototype that's powered by 330 microwatts of wireless radio-frequency power, and believe the lenses could also be used as biosensors to deliver body chemistry readings (including blood sugar levels).
But 'What we've done so far barely hints at what will soon be possible with this technology,' says Dr.
Parviz."</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225402</id>
	<title>What could possibly go wrong?</title>
	<author>140Mandak262Jamuna</author>
	<datestamp>1257174120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Let us make some Laser emitting diodes and put them behind the eyelids so that they cant even avoid it by closing their eye lids. Wow!  You are en evil genius Dr Parviz.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Let us make some Laser emitting diodes and put them behind the eyelids so that they cant even avoid it by closing their eye lids .
Wow ! You are en evil genius Dr Parviz .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let us make some Laser emitting diodes and put them behind the eyelids so that they cant even avoid it by closing their eye lids.
Wow!  You are en evil genius Dr Parviz.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30226176</id>
	<title>How does focussing work?</title>
	<author>jeroen94704</author>
	<datestamp>1257178620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Can anyone shed some light on how the optics of a contact-lens display would work? After all, when all is said and done, this is going to be a display that is not simply "close" to your eye, but ON TOP of it, and I don't know about others, but my eyes are unable to focus on anything closer than 5 cm (2") or so.<br>
<br>
There are mirror/lens systems in VR-helmets and those fancy spectacle-like, wearable displays that create a virtual display some distance away from the viewer, but I don't see how that could be replicated in a contact lens.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Can anyone shed some light on how the optics of a contact-lens display would work ?
After all , when all is said and done , this is going to be a display that is not simply " close " to your eye , but ON TOP of it , and I do n't know about others , but my eyes are unable to focus on anything closer than 5 cm ( 2 " ) or so .
There are mirror/lens systems in VR-helmets and those fancy spectacle-like , wearable displays that create a virtual display some distance away from the viewer , but I do n't see how that could be replicated in a contact lens .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can anyone shed some light on how the optics of a contact-lens display would work?
After all, when all is said and done, this is going to be a display that is not simply "close" to your eye, but ON TOP of it, and I don't know about others, but my eyes are unable to focus on anything closer than 5 cm (2") or so.
There are mirror/lens systems in VR-helmets and those fancy spectacle-like, wearable displays that create a virtual display some distance away from the viewer, but I don't see how that could be replicated in a contact lens.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30226316</id>
	<title>Don't fall into the perfection trap</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1257179280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't try to make a contact that does everything you think of. Get some that provide some functionality. An interface for smart phones s a great start.</p><p>Thise has killed a lot of products from the consumer market. For example, VR. Every body wanted to release a fully functional 3d VR with near perfect graphics. This was completly unreasonable for the consumer market.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't try to make a contact that does everything you think of .
Get some that provide some functionality .
An interface for smart phones s a great start.Thise has killed a lot of products from the consumer market .
For example , VR .
Every body wanted to release a fully functional 3d VR with near perfect graphics .
This was completly unreasonable for the consumer market .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't try to make a contact that does everything you think of.
Get some that provide some functionality.
An interface for smart phones s a great start.Thise has killed a lot of products from the consumer market.
For example, VR.
Every body wanted to release a fully functional 3d VR with near perfect graphics.
This was completly unreasonable for the consumer market.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225570</id>
	<title>Hacked</title>
	<author>RNLockwood</author>
	<datestamp>1257175140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Someone is driving on the freeway at night going 75 wearing the smart contacts.  As a van is passed on a curve all the LEDs in the contacts light up fully.  "Single car crash", states the report, "must have fallen asleep".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Someone is driving on the freeway at night going 75 wearing the smart contacts .
As a van is passed on a curve all the LEDs in the contacts light up fully .
" Single car crash " , states the report , " must have fallen asleep " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Someone is driving on the freeway at night going 75 wearing the smart contacts.
As a van is passed on a curve all the LEDs in the contacts light up fully.
"Single car crash", states the report, "must have fallen asleep".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30227600</id>
	<title>Re:No contacts, please</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257185580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not only that, but having the circuitry in an easily removable pair of glasses lets me crush them in my hand when I read the value of something as "over 9000".  Doing the same with a contact lens would either waste a lot of time, or leave you with an eye missing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not only that , but having the circuitry in an easily removable pair of glasses lets me crush them in my hand when I read the value of something as " over 9000 " .
Doing the same with a contact lens would either waste a lot of time , or leave you with an eye missing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not only that, but having the circuitry in an easily removable pair of glasses lets me crush them in my hand when I read the value of something as "over 9000".
Doing the same with a contact lens would either waste a lot of time, or leave you with an eye missing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225360</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30226456</id>
	<title>Anonymous Coward</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257180000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I invision eye cancers<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I invision eye cancers : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I invision eye cancers :)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30227284</id>
	<title>Re:Focus?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257183960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why the hell not?  Lasers are *light*.  Your retina is exposed to *light* all freaking day long.  That's it's *job*.</p><p>The word 'laser' does not mean 'beam of light so intense it will burn a hole in your head'.  It means 'focused, coherent beam of light'.  You can do that at any intensity you like (low intensity is easier than high intensity).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why the hell not ?
Lasers are * light * .
Your retina is exposed to * light * all freaking day long .
That 's it 's * job * .The word 'laser ' does not mean 'beam of light so intense it will burn a hole in your head' .
It means 'focused , coherent beam of light' .
You can do that at any intensity you like ( low intensity is easier than high intensity ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why the hell not?
Lasers are *light*.
Your retina is exposed to *light* all freaking day long.
That's it's *job*.The word 'laser' does not mean 'beam of light so intense it will burn a hole in your head'.
It means 'focused, coherent beam of light'.
You can do that at any intensity you like (low intensity is easier than high intensity).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30226124</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30226246</id>
	<title>Re:I Seem to Have Misplaced Them ...</title>
	<author>brian0918</author>
	<datestamp>1257178920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Your statements are making me sick to my stomach... I think I'll go to the bathroom and use <b>the three seashells</b>.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Your statements are making me sick to my stomach... I think I 'll go to the bathroom and use the three seashells .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your statements are making me sick to my stomach... I think I'll go to the bathroom and use the three seashells.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225332</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30227216</id>
	<title>Re:No contacts, please</title>
	<author>Aldhibah</author>
	<datestamp>1257183660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The contact lenses designed for athletes are not designed to reduce the brightness but filter our UV rays and increase contrast unlike the polarizing sunglasses you most likely had.  The goal is to reduce retinal damage but maintain the tone of the muscles which control the iris.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The contact lenses designed for athletes are not designed to reduce the brightness but filter our UV rays and increase contrast unlike the polarizing sunglasses you most likely had .
The goal is to reduce retinal damage but maintain the tone of the muscles which control the iris .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The contact lenses designed for athletes are not designed to reduce the brightness but filter our UV rays and increase contrast unlike the polarizing sunglasses you most likely had.
The goal is to reduce retinal damage but maintain the tone of the muscles which control the iris.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225816</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30227350</id>
	<title>Contacts bruise my eyes.</title>
	<author>SoupIsGood Food</author>
	<datestamp>1257184380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, getting them on and off does. I have to wear glasses, as contacts either pop off at ten-minute intervals or stick on my eyeballs like they were glued there. If the <i>optometrist</i> bruises the hell out of your eye trying to pry the little frigger off, then contacts are not for you. (There is a =reason= Lenscrafters is still in business.) You can't wave it away with folksy home-remedies and anecdotal tales of adjustment - contact lenses are simply unusable for a significant chunk of the population, and building the next big interface around them is a sucker's game.</p><p>Figure out how to feed information into the optic nerve or vision centers of the brain non-intrusively, and you have a winner.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , getting them on and off does .
I have to wear glasses , as contacts either pop off at ten-minute intervals or stick on my eyeballs like they were glued there .
If the optometrist bruises the hell out of your eye trying to pry the little frigger off , then contacts are not for you .
( There is a = reason = Lenscrafters is still in business .
) You ca n't wave it away with folksy home-remedies and anecdotal tales of adjustment - contact lenses are simply unusable for a significant chunk of the population , and building the next big interface around them is a sucker 's game.Figure out how to feed information into the optic nerve or vision centers of the brain non-intrusively , and you have a winner .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, getting them on and off does.
I have to wear glasses, as contacts either pop off at ten-minute intervals or stick on my eyeballs like they were glued there.
If the optometrist bruises the hell out of your eye trying to pry the little frigger off, then contacts are not for you.
(There is a =reason= Lenscrafters is still in business.
) You can't wave it away with folksy home-remedies and anecdotal tales of adjustment - contact lenses are simply unusable for a significant chunk of the population, and building the next big interface around them is a sucker's game.Figure out how to feed information into the optic nerve or vision centers of the brain non-intrusively, and you have a winner.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225920</id>
	<title>How do you look at specific things with them?</title>
	<author>foodnugget</author>
	<datestamp>1257177300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't have contacts, but from what i understand, they center on your cornea and move with your eye, right?<br> <br>
How would someone "look around" on a screen with contacts? Wouldn't the center of the screen always be what you're looking at, drastically minimizing what you can read and properly make out?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't have contacts , but from what i understand , they center on your cornea and move with your eye , right ?
How would someone " look around " on a screen with contacts ?
Would n't the center of the screen always be what you 're looking at , drastically minimizing what you can read and properly make out ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't have contacts, but from what i understand, they center on your cornea and move with your eye, right?
How would someone "look around" on a screen with contacts?
Wouldn't the center of the screen always be what you're looking at, drastically minimizing what you can read and properly make out?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30226124</id>
	<title>Re:Focus?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257178440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>
Let me just make sure I read this right...you want to shoot lasers directly onto my retina?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Let me just make sure I read this right...you want to shoot lasers directly onto my retina ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Let me just make sure I read this right...you want to shoot lasers directly onto my retina?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225518</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225774</id>
	<title>Re:Half an hour to insert</title>
	<author>wisdom\_brewing</author>
	<datestamp>1257176520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>For me its the same problem, I wear the leave in overnight lenses occasionally and dont ger enough practice.<br> <br>My girlfriend puts hers in/takes them out in seconds, for me it can take a few minutes to half an hour...<br> <br>I have very deep set eyes, so that even the person showing me how to insert the lenses had to make several attempts.<br> <br>Once every few months i make the effort (before a beach or ski holiday for example) but generally its easier for me to just wear glasses.</htmltext>
<tokenext>For me its the same problem , I wear the leave in overnight lenses occasionally and dont ger enough practice .
My girlfriend puts hers in/takes them out in seconds , for me it can take a few minutes to half an hour... I have very deep set eyes , so that even the person showing me how to insert the lenses had to make several attempts .
Once every few months i make the effort ( before a beach or ski holiday for example ) but generally its easier for me to just wear glasses .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For me its the same problem, I wear the leave in overnight lenses occasionally and dont ger enough practice.
My girlfriend puts hers in/takes them out in seconds, for me it can take a few minutes to half an hour... I have very deep set eyes, so that even the person showing me how to insert the lenses had to make several attempts.
Once every few months i make the effort (before a beach or ski holiday for example) but generally its easier for me to just wear glasses.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225464</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225556</id>
	<title>The ultimate adware</title>
	<author>mario\_grgic</author>
	<datestamp>1257175080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is the marketing wet dream, forced ads right on the surface of your eyes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is the marketing wet dream , forced ads right on the surface of your eyes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is the marketing wet dream, forced ads right on the surface of your eyes.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30229302</id>
	<title>Re:I Seem to Have Misplaced Them ...</title>
	<author>Galaphine</author>
	<datestamp>1257193080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Slashdot:  First <b>Contact</b>:<br><b>Boldly</b> going where no <b>HTML</b> tag has gone <b>before</b>!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Slashdot : First Contact : Boldly going where no HTML tag has gone before !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Slashdot:  First Contact:Boldly going where no HTML tag has gone before!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225332</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225652</id>
	<title>Ultimate terminator "costume"?</title>
	<author>sznupi</author>
	<datestamp>1257175620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Even better, make those lenses so that they emit faint red light "<i>outwards</i>", scaring the crap out of most people that will look into your eyes.</p><p>(might be already doable, with "phosphor" &amp; low intensity radiation source, like in Russian watches...not sure about the shielding and the risk of cataract though<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;/ )</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Even better , make those lenses so that they emit faint red light " outwards " , scaring the crap out of most people that will look into your eyes .
( might be already doable , with " phosphor " &amp; low intensity radiation source , like in Russian watches...not sure about the shielding and the risk of cataract though ; / )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Even better, make those lenses so that they emit faint red light "outwards", scaring the crap out of most people that will look into your eyes.
(might be already doable, with "phosphor" &amp; low intensity radiation source, like in Russian watches...not sure about the shielding and the risk of cataract though ;/ )</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225402</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30227054</id>
	<title>How do you focus?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257182820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Doesn't a contact lens sit closer to a human eye than anyone could ever actually focus their eyes on?  In fact doesn't it sit on the focusing element? I guess the retina is different from the lens, but they are not very far apart IIRC, and can probably be considered one optic.  IANAO (O = opthamologist) as you can tell, but I know a thing or two about optics.  You cannot just display an image (either by absorption of the backlight or emission from tiny LEDS) onto an imaging lens (human or mechanical) that looks like what you want to display the way you can with a HUD or a computer monitor.  What you percieve as spatially separated regions in your view map to different angles of incidence of light rays impinging on your lens.  Each "pixel" in your eye (or literal pixel in a camera) collects light passing through all regions of the lens, but only at one angle.  So to create a 256x256 display on a contact image that appeared in focus, the lens would have to emit light over a controllable grid of 256x256 angles.
<p>
I don't know that the technology is theoretically impossible, but I think articles like this usually gloss over this not at all minor technical difficulty.  Transparent circuitry is much easier because of this same phenomenon.  If you cover up 50\% of the area of a contact lens with completely opaque circuitry, you won't see the circuits in your vision, you'll just see a reduced intensity as if you were wearing sunglasses, because the circuitry will be so out of focus it will appear uniform.  If your circuitry is only covering 10\% of the area, you probably won't even notice the difference.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does n't a contact lens sit closer to a human eye than anyone could ever actually focus their eyes on ?
In fact does n't it sit on the focusing element ?
I guess the retina is different from the lens , but they are not very far apart IIRC , and can probably be considered one optic .
IANAO ( O = opthamologist ) as you can tell , but I know a thing or two about optics .
You can not just display an image ( either by absorption of the backlight or emission from tiny LEDS ) onto an imaging lens ( human or mechanical ) that looks like what you want to display the way you can with a HUD or a computer monitor .
What you percieve as spatially separated regions in your view map to different angles of incidence of light rays impinging on your lens .
Each " pixel " in your eye ( or literal pixel in a camera ) collects light passing through all regions of the lens , but only at one angle .
So to create a 256x256 display on a contact image that appeared in focus , the lens would have to emit light over a controllable grid of 256x256 angles .
I do n't know that the technology is theoretically impossible , but I think articles like this usually gloss over this not at all minor technical difficulty .
Transparent circuitry is much easier because of this same phenomenon .
If you cover up 50 \ % of the area of a contact lens with completely opaque circuitry , you wo n't see the circuits in your vision , you 'll just see a reduced intensity as if you were wearing sunglasses , because the circuitry will be so out of focus it will appear uniform .
If your circuitry is only covering 10 \ % of the area , you probably wo n't even notice the difference .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Doesn't a contact lens sit closer to a human eye than anyone could ever actually focus their eyes on?
In fact doesn't it sit on the focusing element?
I guess the retina is different from the lens, but they are not very far apart IIRC, and can probably be considered one optic.
IANAO (O = opthamologist) as you can tell, but I know a thing or two about optics.
You cannot just display an image (either by absorption of the backlight or emission from tiny LEDS) onto an imaging lens (human or mechanical) that looks like what you want to display the way you can with a HUD or a computer monitor.
What you percieve as spatially separated regions in your view map to different angles of incidence of light rays impinging on your lens.
Each "pixel" in your eye (or literal pixel in a camera) collects light passing through all regions of the lens, but only at one angle.
So to create a 256x256 display on a contact image that appeared in focus, the lens would have to emit light over a controllable grid of 256x256 angles.
I don't know that the technology is theoretically impossible, but I think articles like this usually gloss over this not at all minor technical difficulty.
Transparent circuitry is much easier because of this same phenomenon.
If you cover up 50\% of the area of a contact lens with completely opaque circuitry, you won't see the circuits in your vision, you'll just see a reduced intensity as if you were wearing sunglasses, because the circuitry will be so out of focus it will appear uniform.
If your circuitry is only covering 10\% of the area, you probably won't even notice the difference.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225606</id>
	<title>The Blue</title>
	<author>JustOK</author>
	<datestamp>1257175380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Blue Cataract of Death.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Blue Cataract of Death .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Blue Cataract of Death.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30226060</id>
	<title>Re:No contacts, please</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257178080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, a solution for people with extreme photophobia is what you call "contact sunglasses". You can get them in all kinds of shades, even nearly black at 90\%. In my experience it takes people quite a while before they notice that it's weird.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , a solution for people with extreme photophobia is what you call " contact sunglasses " .
You can get them in all kinds of shades , even nearly black at 90 \ % .
In my experience it takes people quite a while before they notice that it 's weird .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, a solution for people with extreme photophobia is what you call "contact sunglasses".
You can get them in all kinds of shades, even nearly black at 90\%.
In my experience it takes people quite a while before they notice that it's weird.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225360</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225718</id>
	<title>Pipe Dream, like last time.</title>
	<author>Remus Shepherd</author>
	<datestamp>1257176040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We've had <a href="http://science.slashdot.org/story/09/09/01/1619248/Augmented-Reality-In-a-Contact-Lens" title="slashdot.org">this discussion before</a> [slashdot.org].  I'll bring up the same point as I did last time:  Contact lens displays are going to be limited by the power requirements.  The solution they have in this article is equivalent to <i>pressing a cellphone antenna up to your eyeball</i>.  It's not going to be healthy; a lot of people would go blind at that level of radiation.</p><p>My advice is to wait for the full computer-brain interface.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We 've had this discussion before [ slashdot.org ] .
I 'll bring up the same point as I did last time : Contact lens displays are going to be limited by the power requirements .
The solution they have in this article is equivalent to pressing a cellphone antenna up to your eyeball .
It 's not going to be healthy ; a lot of people would go blind at that level of radiation.My advice is to wait for the full computer-brain interface .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We've had this discussion before [slashdot.org].
I'll bring up the same point as I did last time:  Contact lens displays are going to be limited by the power requirements.
The solution they have in this article is equivalent to pressing a cellphone antenna up to your eyeball.
It's not going to be healthy; a lot of people would go blind at that level of radiation.My advice is to wait for the full computer-brain interface.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30227658</id>
	<title>Hijacking</title>
	<author>z80kid</author>
	<datestamp>1257185700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>And I'm working on a device to hijack those displays.<p>
I call it "The Ultimate Goatse Device"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And I 'm working on a device to hijack those displays .
I call it " The Ultimate Goatse Device "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And I'm working on a device to hijack those displays.
I call it "The Ultimate Goatse Device"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30228642</id>
	<title>Re:No contacts, please</title>
	<author>MobyDisk</author>
	<datestamp>1257190380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>You don't see anyone wearing contact sunglasses, now do you? Not even the ones that darken in sunlight and lighten indoors. Contact lens computer displays is a dumb idea.</p></div><p>Did you just argue that since one use of contact lenses is bad, all uses of it are bad?</p><p>Contact lens sunglasses are a bad idea because people need to remove them when they go indoors, or at night.  Inserting/removing contacts is non-trivial, as you know from experience.  The ones that auto-change have a whole other suite of disadvantages.  These disadvantages would not necessarily apply to a contact-lens HUD.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You do n't see anyone wearing contact sunglasses , now do you ?
Not even the ones that darken in sunlight and lighten indoors .
Contact lens computer displays is a dumb idea.Did you just argue that since one use of contact lenses is bad , all uses of it are bad ? Contact lens sunglasses are a bad idea because people need to remove them when they go indoors , or at night .
Inserting/removing contacts is non-trivial , as you know from experience .
The ones that auto-change have a whole other suite of disadvantages .
These disadvantages would not necessarily apply to a contact-lens HUD .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You don't see anyone wearing contact sunglasses, now do you?
Not even the ones that darken in sunlight and lighten indoors.
Contact lens computer displays is a dumb idea.Did you just argue that since one use of contact lenses is bad, all uses of it are bad?Contact lens sunglasses are a bad idea because people need to remove them when they go indoors, or at night.
Inserting/removing contacts is non-trivial, as you know from experience.
The ones that auto-change have a whole other suite of disadvantages.
These disadvantages would not necessarily apply to a contact-lens HUD.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225360</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225768</id>
	<title>Re:Focus?</title>
	<author>Shrike82</author>
	<datestamp>1257176460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I think the real key will be putting MEMS-directed lasers in there which can draw on the retina, bypassing focussing entirely.</p></div><p>"Yes officer, I know I just ran over and killed seven children. I was blinded by the lasers in my contact lenses you see..."</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think the real key will be putting MEMS-directed lasers in there which can draw on the retina , bypassing focussing entirely .
" Yes officer , I know I just ran over and killed seven children .
I was blinded by the lasers in my contact lenses you see... "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think the real key will be putting MEMS-directed lasers in there which can draw on the retina, bypassing focussing entirely.
"Yes officer, I know I just ran over and killed seven children.
I was blinded by the lasers in my contact lenses you see..."
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225518</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30226058</id>
	<title>Re:No contacts, please</title>
	<author>maxume</author>
	<datestamp>1257178080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I much prefer flimsy plastic to invasive surgery (and I don't <em>require</em> correction to function, I just benefit from it), so bring them on. Just because your eye blew up doesn't mean there aren't millions of people that benefit from contact lenses, and the ability to put information there (or choose not to) would be 100\% feature.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I much prefer flimsy plastic to invasive surgery ( and I do n't require correction to function , I just benefit from it ) , so bring them on .
Just because your eye blew up does n't mean there are n't millions of people that benefit from contact lenses , and the ability to put information there ( or choose not to ) would be 100 \ % feature .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I much prefer flimsy plastic to invasive surgery (and I don't require correction to function, I just benefit from it), so bring them on.
Just because your eye blew up doesn't mean there aren't millions of people that benefit from contact lenses, and the ability to put information there (or choose not to) would be 100\% feature.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225360</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225360</id>
	<title>No contacts, please</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1257173880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I <a href="http://slashdot.org/~sm62704/journal/141778" title="slashdot.org">got rid of my contacts</a> [slashdot.org] back in 2006 (I'm a cyborg). For nearsightedness they're far better than glasses because you need to see all day long, but for a display they're not the right platform. Put those transparent circutis in a pair of glasses; I can keep them in my pocket for when they're needed.</p><p>You don't see anyone wearing contact sunglasses, now do you? Not even the ones that darken in sunlight and lighten indoors. Contact lens computer displays is a dumb idea.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I got rid of my contacts [ slashdot.org ] back in 2006 ( I 'm a cyborg ) .
For nearsightedness they 're far better than glasses because you need to see all day long , but for a display they 're not the right platform .
Put those transparent circutis in a pair of glasses ; I can keep them in my pocket for when they 're needed.You do n't see anyone wearing contact sunglasses , now do you ?
Not even the ones that darken in sunlight and lighten indoors .
Contact lens computer displays is a dumb idea .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I got rid of my contacts [slashdot.org] back in 2006 (I'm a cyborg).
For nearsightedness they're far better than glasses because you need to see all day long, but for a display they're not the right platform.
Put those transparent circutis in a pair of glasses; I can keep them in my pocket for when they're needed.You don't see anyone wearing contact sunglasses, now do you?
Not even the ones that darken in sunlight and lighten indoors.
Contact lens computer displays is a dumb idea.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30228468</id>
	<title>Re:What could possibly go wrong?</title>
	<author>MikeBabcock</author>
	<datestamp>1257189540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you mounted a nice little fibre-optic receivers on your clothing you could even see behind you or in various direction with your eyes open or closed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you mounted a nice little fibre-optic receivers on your clothing you could even see behind you or in various direction with your eyes open or closed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you mounted a nice little fibre-optic receivers on your clothing you could even see behind you or in various direction with your eyes open or closed.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225402</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225848</id>
	<title>Re:Hacked</title>
	<author>clt829</author>
	<datestamp>1257177000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Someone is driving on the freeway at night going 75 wearing the smart contacts.  As a van is passed on a curve all the LEDs in the contacts light up fully.  "Single car crash", states the report, "must have fallen asleep".</p></div><p>Gives new meaning to BSOD!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Someone is driving on the freeway at night going 75 wearing the smart contacts .
As a van is passed on a curve all the LEDs in the contacts light up fully .
" Single car crash " , states the report , " must have fallen asleep " .Gives new meaning to BSOD !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Someone is driving on the freeway at night going 75 wearing the smart contacts.
As a van is passed on a curve all the LEDs in the contacts light up fully.
"Single car crash", states the report, "must have fallen asleep".Gives new meaning to BSOD!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225570</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225942</id>
	<title>Re:What could possibly go wrong?</title>
	<author>Whalou</author>
	<datestamp>1257177480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Don't try to pull your mind out of the gutter.  That's impossible.  Instead, you just have to realize the truth.  There is no gutter.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't try to pull your mind out of the gutter .
That 's impossible .
Instead , you just have to realize the truth .
There is no gutter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't try to pull your mind out of the gutter.
That's impossible.
Instead, you just have to realize the truth.
There is no gutter.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225460</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225816</id>
	<title>Re:No contacts, please</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257176760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>they're rather expensive.</i></p><p>I can't understand why they would be. I had a pair of the sun-sensitive glasses years ago, and they didn't cost any more than regular glasses.</p><p>BTW, those glasses are NOT GOOD. Like any other muscle, your iris atrophes with disuse and after a year or two, walking outside with the sun sensitive glasses is no different than walking outside with regular glasses for someone who hasn't worn the sun-sensitive ones. And if you walk outside without them it's REALLY bright.</p><p>If you wear glasses, get contacts and use regular sunglasses, or clip on sunglasses. I can't understand how eye doctors can't know those things are bad for your eyes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>they 're rather expensive.I ca n't understand why they would be .
I had a pair of the sun-sensitive glasses years ago , and they did n't cost any more than regular glasses.BTW , those glasses are NOT GOOD .
Like any other muscle , your iris atrophes with disuse and after a year or two , walking outside with the sun sensitive glasses is no different than walking outside with regular glasses for someone who has n't worn the sun-sensitive ones .
And if you walk outside without them it 's REALLY bright.If you wear glasses , get contacts and use regular sunglasses , or clip on sunglasses .
I ca n't understand how eye doctors ca n't know those things are bad for your eyes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>they're rather expensive.I can't understand why they would be.
I had a pair of the sun-sensitive glasses years ago, and they didn't cost any more than regular glasses.BTW, those glasses are NOT GOOD.
Like any other muscle, your iris atrophes with disuse and after a year or two, walking outside with the sun sensitive glasses is no different than walking outside with regular glasses for someone who hasn't worn the sun-sensitive ones.
And if you walk outside without them it's REALLY bright.If you wear glasses, get contacts and use regular sunglasses, or clip on sunglasses.
I can't understand how eye doctors can't know those things are bad for your eyes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225510</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225510</id>
	<title>Re:No contacts, please</title>
	<author>thesandtiger</author>
	<datestamp>1257174900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Professional athletes wear sun-sensitive contacts, actually. They're about the only people who have a big enough need for that kind of thing and can afford them - they're rather expensive.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Professional athletes wear sun-sensitive contacts , actually .
They 're about the only people who have a big enough need for that kind of thing and can afford them - they 're rather expensive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Professional athletes wear sun-sensitive contacts, actually.
They're about the only people who have a big enough need for that kind of thing and can afford them - they're rather expensive.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225360</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225432</id>
	<title>Problem.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257174360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I guess you're fucked if it falls out.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I guess you 're fucked if it falls out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I guess you're fucked if it falls out.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225554</id>
	<title>Health Aspects</title>
	<author>mindaktiviti</author>
	<datestamp>1257175080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is there a study or research done on the health aspects?  I would imagine putting powered circuitry into your eyes is a recipe for disaster.  Something that is deemed as safe as todays contact lenses would be the only thing I would ever even want to try.</p><p>Also... optically speaking would you be able to read text that is effectively right against your eye?  Can we focus clearly that closely?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is there a study or research done on the health aspects ?
I would imagine putting powered circuitry into your eyes is a recipe for disaster .
Something that is deemed as safe as todays contact lenses would be the only thing I would ever even want to try.Also... optically speaking would you be able to read text that is effectively right against your eye ?
Can we focus clearly that closely ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is there a study or research done on the health aspects?
I would imagine putting powered circuitry into your eyes is a recipe for disaster.
Something that is deemed as safe as todays contact lenses would be the only thing I would ever even want to try.Also... optically speaking would you be able to read text that is effectively right against your eye?
Can we focus clearly that closely?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30226082</id>
	<title>Re:Half an hour to insert</title>
	<author>teh kurisu</author>
	<datestamp>1257178200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I tried contacts but had the same problem, only it took me much longer than you to get them in and out.  I decided to give up after one night when I was up until 4am trying to get the bloody things out before going to bed (having started at 10pm).</p><p>I'm quite comfortable wearing my glasses (in fact, while wearing contacts I found myself habitually touching my nose as if to re-position my glasses), and I really don't like touching my eyes, so the whole thing was a bit of a non-starter.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I tried contacts but had the same problem , only it took me much longer than you to get them in and out .
I decided to give up after one night when I was up until 4am trying to get the bloody things out before going to bed ( having started at 10pm ) .I 'm quite comfortable wearing my glasses ( in fact , while wearing contacts I found myself habitually touching my nose as if to re-position my glasses ) , and I really do n't like touching my eyes , so the whole thing was a bit of a non-starter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I tried contacts but had the same problem, only it took me much longer than you to get them in and out.
I decided to give up after one night when I was up until 4am trying to get the bloody things out before going to bed (having started at 10pm).I'm quite comfortable wearing my glasses (in fact, while wearing contacts I found myself habitually touching my nose as if to re-position my glasses), and I really don't like touching my eyes, so the whole thing was a bit of a non-starter.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225464</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30230958</id>
	<title>Re:I Seem to Have Misplaced Them ...</title>
	<author>Burning1</author>
	<datestamp>1257158940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't see it happening, if for any other reason than insurance rates are going to skyrocket.</p><p>Look at motorcycle personal injury lawyers. Have you ever noticed how many of them are running ads in the yellow pages and on TV? Payouts are huge, because liability in a motorcycle accident is huge. Large hospital bills and large pain and suffering damages means a lot of money can be made.</p><p>What does this have to do with the flying car?</p><p>Imagine the lawsuit that would result from one flying car driver nicking another, causing a crash into a home. As flying cars become more popular, I suspect that the rate of fatal accidents with huge property damage will increase to the point that the flying car would no longer become a viable form of travel.</p><p>I suspect that existing solutions to congestion will be more effective - buses, rail, and carpool lanes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't see it happening , if for any other reason than insurance rates are going to skyrocket.Look at motorcycle personal injury lawyers .
Have you ever noticed how many of them are running ads in the yellow pages and on TV ?
Payouts are huge , because liability in a motorcycle accident is huge .
Large hospital bills and large pain and suffering damages means a lot of money can be made.What does this have to do with the flying car ? Imagine the lawsuit that would result from one flying car driver nicking another , causing a crash into a home .
As flying cars become more popular , I suspect that the rate of fatal accidents with huge property damage will increase to the point that the flying car would no longer become a viable form of travel.I suspect that existing solutions to congestion will be more effective - buses , rail , and carpool lanes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't see it happening, if for any other reason than insurance rates are going to skyrocket.Look at motorcycle personal injury lawyers.
Have you ever noticed how many of them are running ads in the yellow pages and on TV?
Payouts are huge, because liability in a motorcycle accident is huge.
Large hospital bills and large pain and suffering damages means a lot of money can be made.What does this have to do with the flying car?Imagine the lawsuit that would result from one flying car driver nicking another, causing a crash into a home.
As flying cars become more popular, I suspect that the rate of fatal accidents with huge property damage will increase to the point that the flying car would no longer become a viable form of travel.I suspect that existing solutions to congestion will be more effective - buses, rail, and carpool lanes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225950</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30227290</id>
	<title>Hundreds of LEDs</title>
	<author>Hell O'World</author>
	<datestamp>1257184020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hundreds of LEDs? Why, you could make a 10 X 10 pixel display with that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hundreds of LEDs ?
Why , you could make a 10 X 10 pixel display with that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hundreds of LEDs?
Why, you could make a 10 X 10 pixel display with that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30227436</id>
	<title>Re:Focus?</title>
	<author>illu</author>
	<datestamp>1257184800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://spectrum.ieee.org/biomedical/bionics/augmented-reality-in-a-contact-lens/1" title="ieee.org" rel="nofollow">Here</a> [ieee.org] is a much more detailed article that answers your question (and more !). Look at the last paragraph of page 2 and the first of page 3.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Here [ ieee.org ] is a much more detailed article that answers your question ( and more ! ) .
Look at the last paragraph of page 2 and the first of page 3 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here [ieee.org] is a much more detailed article that answers your question (and more !).
Look at the last paragraph of page 2 and the first of page 3.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225518</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225950</id>
	<title>Re:I Seem to Have Misplaced Them ...</title>
	<author>rolfwind</author>
	<datestamp>1257177540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Oh, that's right, I left them out in the garage in my flying car. You see, I was running Duke Nukem Forever in Hurd but the battery ran out of power so I set them aside to bring in and recharge at my tabletop cold fusion station. It's okay though, I'll have forever to enjoy them now that Ray Kurzweil's Singularity has happened.</p></div></blockquote><p>If the population grows, the flying car has to happen one day, because the roads just get too congested otherwise.  I see pictures of India's streets today and shudder when even 25\% can and do own cars.  China is already experiencing those problems.  It's either that, or a real mass transit system like the Germans have, coupled with a revolutionary short distance personal transportation device, something that the Segway was rumored to be, but just wasn't.  A bike would do, though a bit slow, a scooter like the original honda cub isn't bad either, but neither fold up enough to take on most busses, trains.  It would also take an attitude adjustment on people's parts.  The flying car just isn't reality because neither aerodynamic nor lift principles would be satisfactory for the human limitation involved, and anti-gravity would work, if such a thing existed.  I would also suggest computer controlled road cars, but I'm not sure if the liability is worth it, if it's only suitable for highways, because, really, people are overall stupid drivers and technology (phones) is only making it worse so far.</p><p>DNF is just a game and technically feasible, they just were directionless and unhappy with everything they made.  Hurd was superceded by Linux, so it's like complaining that an effective gas lamp was never invented when the lightbulb is already here.</p><p>Cold Fusion may be a pipe dream... but I hope they accompany these computer lenses with eyeglass counterparts.  I don't like contacts, personally.  I can see it happen, but I'd figure the computer power to get anything done would have to be miniaturized so much it'll be at least another 20 years... or that they have a terminal/server configuration where the lens/eyeglass acts as only a display wirelessly connected to a real computer elsewhere, be it on the person himself somewhere or on the internet.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh , that 's right , I left them out in the garage in my flying car .
You see , I was running Duke Nukem Forever in Hurd but the battery ran out of power so I set them aside to bring in and recharge at my tabletop cold fusion station .
It 's okay though , I 'll have forever to enjoy them now that Ray Kurzweil 's Singularity has happened.If the population grows , the flying car has to happen one day , because the roads just get too congested otherwise .
I see pictures of India 's streets today and shudder when even 25 \ % can and do own cars .
China is already experiencing those problems .
It 's either that , or a real mass transit system like the Germans have , coupled with a revolutionary short distance personal transportation device , something that the Segway was rumored to be , but just was n't .
A bike would do , though a bit slow , a scooter like the original honda cub is n't bad either , but neither fold up enough to take on most busses , trains .
It would also take an attitude adjustment on people 's parts .
The flying car just is n't reality because neither aerodynamic nor lift principles would be satisfactory for the human limitation involved , and anti-gravity would work , if such a thing existed .
I would also suggest computer controlled road cars , but I 'm not sure if the liability is worth it , if it 's only suitable for highways , because , really , people are overall stupid drivers and technology ( phones ) is only making it worse so far.DNF is just a game and technically feasible , they just were directionless and unhappy with everything they made .
Hurd was superceded by Linux , so it 's like complaining that an effective gas lamp was never invented when the lightbulb is already here.Cold Fusion may be a pipe dream... but I hope they accompany these computer lenses with eyeglass counterparts .
I do n't like contacts , personally .
I can see it happen , but I 'd figure the computer power to get anything done would have to be miniaturized so much it 'll be at least another 20 years... or that they have a terminal/server configuration where the lens/eyeglass acts as only a display wirelessly connected to a real computer elsewhere , be it on the person himself somewhere or on the internet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh, that's right, I left them out in the garage in my flying car.
You see, I was running Duke Nukem Forever in Hurd but the battery ran out of power so I set them aside to bring in and recharge at my tabletop cold fusion station.
It's okay though, I'll have forever to enjoy them now that Ray Kurzweil's Singularity has happened.If the population grows, the flying car has to happen one day, because the roads just get too congested otherwise.
I see pictures of India's streets today and shudder when even 25\% can and do own cars.
China is already experiencing those problems.
It's either that, or a real mass transit system like the Germans have, coupled with a revolutionary short distance personal transportation device, something that the Segway was rumored to be, but just wasn't.
A bike would do, though a bit slow, a scooter like the original honda cub isn't bad either, but neither fold up enough to take on most busses, trains.
It would also take an attitude adjustment on people's parts.
The flying car just isn't reality because neither aerodynamic nor lift principles would be satisfactory for the human limitation involved, and anti-gravity would work, if such a thing existed.
I would also suggest computer controlled road cars, but I'm not sure if the liability is worth it, if it's only suitable for highways, because, really, people are overall stupid drivers and technology (phones) is only making it worse so far.DNF is just a game and technically feasible, they just were directionless and unhappy with everything they made.
Hurd was superceded by Linux, so it's like complaining that an effective gas lamp was never invented when the lightbulb is already here.Cold Fusion may be a pipe dream... but I hope they accompany these computer lenses with eyeglass counterparts.
I don't like contacts, personally.
I can see it happen, but I'd figure the computer power to get anything done would have to be miniaturized so much it'll be at least another 20 years... or that they have a terminal/server configuration where the lens/eyeglass acts as only a display wirelessly connected to a real computer elsewhere, be it on the person himself somewhere or on the internet.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225332</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225464</id>
	<title>Half an hour to insert</title>
	<author>Darth Sdlavrot</author>
	<datestamp>1257174600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My wife and kids can insert their contacts in minutes. I could never get the hang of it -- it always took me half an hour to put them in and I finally just gave up.</p><p>Highly unlikely that I'd ever use such things.  A HUD in my glasses though, that'd be cool.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My wife and kids can insert their contacts in minutes .
I could never get the hang of it -- it always took me half an hour to put them in and I finally just gave up.Highly unlikely that I 'd ever use such things .
A HUD in my glasses though , that 'd be cool .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My wife and kids can insert their contacts in minutes.
I could never get the hang of it -- it always took me half an hour to put them in and I finally just gave up.Highly unlikely that I'd ever use such things.
A HUD in my glasses though, that'd be cool.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30226914</id>
	<title>Two words...</title>
	<author>vegiVamp</author>
	<datestamp>1257182100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Dennou Coil<br><br>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dennou\_Coil</htmltext>
<tokenext>Dennou Coilhttp : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dennou \ _Coil</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dennou Coilhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dennou\_Coil</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225524</id>
	<title>Where Are Your Contact Lens Displays?</title>
	<author>Saija</author>
	<datestamp>1257174960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>maybe here: <br>
<a href="http://science.slashdot.org/story/09/09/01/1619248/Augmented-Reality-In-a-Contact-Lens" title="slashdot.org">Augmented Reality In a Contact Lens</a> [slashdot.org] <br>
<a href="http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/01/17/1921217" title="slashdot.org">Bionic Contact Lens May Lead to Overlay Displays
</a> [slashdot.org] <br>
<a href="http://ask.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/04/13/1719225" title="slashdot.org">Contact Lenses for Computer Professionals?
</a> [slashdot.org] <br>
<a href="http://science.slashdot.org/science/08/01/17/1921217.shtml" title="slashdot.org">Bionic Contact Lens May Lead to Overlay Displays
</a> [slashdot.org] <br>
<a href="http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/08/12/159248" title="slashdot.org">Smart Contact Lenses
</a> [slashdot.org] <br>
<a href="http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/05/03/0420236&amp;from=rss" title="slashdot.org">Permormance-Enhancing Contact Lenses</a> [slashdot.org] <br> <br>
And for the recursive obssesed folks, there's:<br>
<a href="http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/11/25/1316235" title="slashdot.org">Where Are Your Contact Lens Displays?</a> [slashdot.org]</htmltext>
<tokenext>maybe here : Augmented Reality In a Contact Lens [ slashdot.org ] Bionic Contact Lens May Lead to Overlay Displays [ slashdot.org ] Contact Lenses for Computer Professionals ?
[ slashdot.org ] Bionic Contact Lens May Lead to Overlay Displays [ slashdot.org ] Smart Contact Lenses [ slashdot.org ] Permormance-Enhancing Contact Lenses [ slashdot.org ] And for the recursive obssesed folks , there 's : Where Are Your Contact Lens Displays ?
[ slashdot.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>maybe here: 
Augmented Reality In a Contact Lens [slashdot.org] 
Bionic Contact Lens May Lead to Overlay Displays
 [slashdot.org] 
Contact Lenses for Computer Professionals?
[slashdot.org] 
Bionic Contact Lens May Lead to Overlay Displays
 [slashdot.org] 
Smart Contact Lenses
 [slashdot.org] 
Permormance-Enhancing Contact Lenses [slashdot.org]  
And for the recursive obssesed folks, there's:
Where Are Your Contact Lens Displays?
[slashdot.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30226046</id>
	<title>Re:Half an hour to insert</title>
	<author>pcolaman</author>
	<datestamp>1257178020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You have to keep at it.  Takes a while the first time, and takes a while to get used to.  Optometrist showed me a trick that people use (although I don't need it as I'm perfectly comfortable touching my eye now).  First (obviously), clean your hands very good.  Then, pull down your lower eyelid, under your eye, and touch the tip of your finger to your eyeball.  It's okay if you flinch violently, this takes practice.  Keep doing this many times, and do this exercise I'd say at least a couple of minutes a day for a week or more until you can touch your eyeball without flinching at all.  Then try contacts again.  It'll be much easier to put them in.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You have to keep at it .
Takes a while the first time , and takes a while to get used to .
Optometrist showed me a trick that people use ( although I do n't need it as I 'm perfectly comfortable touching my eye now ) .
First ( obviously ) , clean your hands very good .
Then , pull down your lower eyelid , under your eye , and touch the tip of your finger to your eyeball .
It 's okay if you flinch violently , this takes practice .
Keep doing this many times , and do this exercise I 'd say at least a couple of minutes a day for a week or more until you can touch your eyeball without flinching at all .
Then try contacts again .
It 'll be much easier to put them in .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You have to keep at it.
Takes a while the first time, and takes a while to get used to.
Optometrist showed me a trick that people use (although I don't need it as I'm perfectly comfortable touching my eye now).
First (obviously), clean your hands very good.
Then, pull down your lower eyelid, under your eye, and touch the tip of your finger to your eyeball.
It's okay if you flinch violently, this takes practice.
Keep doing this many times, and do this exercise I'd say at least a couple of minutes a day for a week or more until you can touch your eyeball without flinching at all.
Then try contacts again.
It'll be much easier to put them in.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225464</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30229800</id>
	<title>Re:What could possibly go wrong?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257195480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>These devices could also change the nature of test taking in regards to cheating. It wouldn't be too hard for some idiot with enough money to pass if they could have the answers hovering right in front of them during the test. Now imagine the results of a lot more unqualified people with accreditation than the few that slip through the cracks as it is now.</p><p>Of course this may change the nature of pre-test screening, there might be a need for a full pat-down and visual eye exam before that mulitple choice test or written essay. I'm not sure too many students or people seeking certain licences would care much for that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>These devices could also change the nature of test taking in regards to cheating .
It would n't be too hard for some idiot with enough money to pass if they could have the answers hovering right in front of them during the test .
Now imagine the results of a lot more unqualified people with accreditation than the few that slip through the cracks as it is now.Of course this may change the nature of pre-test screening , there might be a need for a full pat-down and visual eye exam before that mulitple choice test or written essay .
I 'm not sure too many students or people seeking certain licences would care much for that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>These devices could also change the nature of test taking in regards to cheating.
It wouldn't be too hard for some idiot with enough money to pass if they could have the answers hovering right in front of them during the test.
Now imagine the results of a lot more unqualified people with accreditation than the few that slip through the cracks as it is now.Of course this may change the nature of pre-test screening, there might be a need for a full pat-down and visual eye exam before that mulitple choice test or written essay.
I'm not sure too many students or people seeking certain licences would care much for that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225402</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30226022</id>
	<title>What about flexible OLED displays</title>
	<author>Aceticon</author>
	<datestamp>1257177960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm still waiting for the brave new world where you can <a href="http://www.universaldisplay.com/default.asp?contentID=591" title="universaldisplay.com">roll-up your display into a case the size of a pen</a> [universaldisplay.com]</p><p>The whole "display on a contact lens" is even more vaporware than that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm still waiting for the brave new world where you can roll-up your display into a case the size of a pen [ universaldisplay.com ] The whole " display on a contact lens " is even more vaporware than that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm still waiting for the brave new world where you can roll-up your display into a case the size of a pen [universaldisplay.com]The whole "display on a contact lens" is even more vaporware than that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30226068</id>
	<title>I RTFA</title>
	<author>srussia</author>
	<datestamp>1257178140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>And far as I can tell, the contact lenses, THEY DO NOTHING!</htmltext>
<tokenext>And far as I can tell , the contact lenses , THEY DO NOTHING !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And far as I can tell, the contact lenses, THEY DO NOTHING!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30227748</id>
	<title>Re:No contacts, please</title>
	<author>Necron69</author>
	<datestamp>1257186240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'll second that. I wore contacts when I was younger, but since then have developed Sjogren's Syndrome and have severely dry eyes. Contact lenses are an absolute impossibility for me (and millions of others). A display in a pair of eyeglasses is obviously much more useful and less intrusive.</p><p>Necron69</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'll second that .
I wore contacts when I was younger , but since then have developed Sjogren 's Syndrome and have severely dry eyes .
Contact lenses are an absolute impossibility for me ( and millions of others ) .
A display in a pair of eyeglasses is obviously much more useful and less intrusive.Necron69</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'll second that.
I wore contacts when I was younger, but since then have developed Sjogren's Syndrome and have severely dry eyes.
Contact lenses are an absolute impossibility for me (and millions of others).
A display in a pair of eyeglasses is obviously much more useful and less intrusive.Necron69</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225360</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30226320</id>
	<title>Re:Focus?</title>
	<author>jeroen94704</author>
	<datestamp>1257179340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm glad I'm not the only one <a href="http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1456892&amp;cid=30226176" title="slashdot.org">wondering about this</a> [slashdot.org]</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm glad I 'm not the only one wondering about this [ slashdot.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm glad I'm not the only one wondering about this [slashdot.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225518</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30228308</id>
	<title>Intraocular lenses</title>
	<author>nsrbrake</author>
	<datestamp>1257188820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't understand people wanting this and similar technology in a contact lens, we can already replace our original lenses (for reasons such as cataracts). Forget the contacts.</p><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intraocular\_lens" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intraocular\_lens</a> [wikipedia.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't understand people wanting this and similar technology in a contact lens , we can already replace our original lenses ( for reasons such as cataracts ) .
Forget the contacts.http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intraocular \ _lens [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't understand people wanting this and similar technology in a contact lens, we can already replace our original lenses (for reasons such as cataracts).
Forget the contacts.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intraocular\_lens [wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225332</id>
	<title>I Seem to Have Misplaced Them ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257173700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Where Are Your <b>Contact Lens Displays</b>?</p></div><p>Oh, that's right, I left them out in the garage in my <b>flying car</b>.  You see, I was running <b>Duke Nukem Forever</b> in <b>Hurd</b> but the battery ran out of power so I set them aside to bring in and recharge at my <b>tabletop cold fusion station</b>.  It's okay though, I'll have forever to enjoy them now that <b>Ray Kurzweil's Singularity</b> has happened.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Where Are Your Contact Lens Displays ? Oh , that 's right , I left them out in the garage in my flying car .
You see , I was running Duke Nukem Forever in Hurd but the battery ran out of power so I set them aside to bring in and recharge at my tabletop cold fusion station .
It 's okay though , I 'll have forever to enjoy them now that Ray Kurzweil 's Singularity has happened .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Where Are Your Contact Lens Displays?Oh, that's right, I left them out in the garage in my flying car.
You see, I was running Duke Nukem Forever in Hurd but the battery ran out of power so I set them aside to bring in and recharge at my tabletop cold fusion station.
It's okay though, I'll have forever to enjoy them now that Ray Kurzweil's Singularity has happened.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225738</id>
	<title>Hope they don't heat up when they short circuit</title>
	<author>smitty777</author>
	<datestamp>1257176220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Could be kind of painful.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Could be kind of painful .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Could be kind of painful.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30226110</id>
	<title>MTV Cribs is ruined</title>
	<author>lamadude</author>
	<datestamp>1257178320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Welcome to my crib, here is the master bedroom, no plasma TV, but I've got some pretty sweet contact lenses in a drawer somewhere.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Welcome to my crib , here is the master bedroom , no plasma TV , but I 've got some pretty sweet contact lenses in a drawer somewhere .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Welcome to my crib, here is the master bedroom, no plasma TV, but I've got some pretty sweet contact lenses in a drawer somewhere.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30227244</id>
	<title>Getting ahead of ourselves?</title>
	<author>jgotts</author>
	<datestamp>1257183780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Before putting displays in contact lenses, how about fixing the contact lens technology itself so you can actually wear them for longer than 10 hours without itching, stinging, and redness?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Before putting displays in contact lenses , how about fixing the contact lens technology itself so you can actually wear them for longer than 10 hours without itching , stinging , and redness ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Before putting displays in contact lenses, how about fixing the contact lens technology itself so you can actually wear them for longer than 10 hours without itching, stinging, and redness?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225760</id>
	<title>This it great</title>
	<author>AP31R0N</author>
	<datestamp>1257176460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>These will definitely help me find Sarah Connor.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>These will definitely help me find Sarah Connor .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>These will definitely help me find Sarah Connor.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30242716</id>
	<title>Re:Focus?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259258040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Let me just make sure I read this right...you want to shoot lasers directly onto my retina?</p></div><p>Up until now, laser eye procedures have been considered "theraputic" (except where administered by a kid with a laser pointer). Now they will be considered an "elective bodily enhancement". Mmm. Sexy.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Let me just make sure I read this right...you want to shoot lasers directly onto my retina ? Up until now , laser eye procedures have been considered " theraputic " ( except where administered by a kid with a laser pointer ) .
Now they will be considered an " elective bodily enhancement " .
Mmm. Sexy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let me just make sure I read this right...you want to shoot lasers directly onto my retina?Up until now, laser eye procedures have been considered "theraputic" (except where administered by a kid with a laser pointer).
Now they will be considered an "elective bodily enhancement".
Mmm. Sexy.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30226124</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225912</id>
	<title>Like the Iphone?</title>
	<author>mdwh2</author>
	<datestamp>1257177300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes thanks for that - obviously we here at Slashdot are clueless about what a platform is, without a reference to a pop culture reference. (Though I do wonder why you don't at least make a comparison to a more mainstream brand of phones, instead of one that's just a few per cent of the market.)</p><p>No, it couldn't possibly be an attempt to make a story more newsworthy with an "On Your Iphone" reference...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes thanks for that - obviously we here at Slashdot are clueless about what a platform is , without a reference to a pop culture reference .
( Though I do wonder why you do n't at least make a comparison to a more mainstream brand of phones , instead of one that 's just a few per cent of the market .
) No , it could n't possibly be an attempt to make a story more newsworthy with an " On Your Iphone " reference.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes thanks for that - obviously we here at Slashdot are clueless about what a platform is, without a reference to a pop culture reference.
(Though I do wonder why you don't at least make a comparison to a more mainstream brand of phones, instead of one that's just a few per cent of the market.
)No, it couldn't possibly be an attempt to make a story more newsworthy with an "On Your Iphone" reference...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30227434</id>
	<title>Re:No contacts, please</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257184800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Those glasses are worse than you think.  Even though a great majority of the light is blocked out in the forward part of your vision, a large portion is coming around the lenses.  Since your iris has dilated, because you have less light coming in from the front, a lot more is getting in from the sides.  So remember that if you are going to get sunglasses make them as large as possible regardless of fashion.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Those glasses are worse than you think .
Even though a great majority of the light is blocked out in the forward part of your vision , a large portion is coming around the lenses .
Since your iris has dilated , because you have less light coming in from the front , a lot more is getting in from the sides .
So remember that if you are going to get sunglasses make them as large as possible regardless of fashion .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Those glasses are worse than you think.
Even though a great majority of the light is blocked out in the forward part of your vision, a large portion is coming around the lenses.
Since your iris has dilated, because you have less light coming in from the front, a lot more is getting in from the sides.
So remember that if you are going to get sunglasses make them as large as possible regardless of fashion.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225816</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225518</id>
	<title>Focus?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257174900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It strikes me that the real trick isn't putting a display on the lens of the eye, but getting a focussed image. I mean, you could write a crisp, clear letter on someone's eyeball right now, but they wouldn't be able to see it. It'd just be a smudge on their vision. That still leaves you open to using a flash of colour in different directions to attract the wearer's attention to hazards, or other blurry ways of presenting information, mind you. I think the real key will be putting MEMS-directed lasers in there which can draw on the retina, bypassing focussing entirely.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It strikes me that the real trick is n't putting a display on the lens of the eye , but getting a focussed image .
I mean , you could write a crisp , clear letter on someone 's eyeball right now , but they would n't be able to see it .
It 'd just be a smudge on their vision .
That still leaves you open to using a flash of colour in different directions to attract the wearer 's attention to hazards , or other blurry ways of presenting information , mind you .
I think the real key will be putting MEMS-directed lasers in there which can draw on the retina , bypassing focussing entirely .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It strikes me that the real trick isn't putting a display on the lens of the eye, but getting a focussed image.
I mean, you could write a crisp, clear letter on someone's eyeball right now, but they wouldn't be able to see it.
It'd just be a smudge on their vision.
That still leaves you open to using a flash of colour in different directions to attract the wearer's attention to hazards, or other blurry ways of presenting information, mind you.
I think the real key will be putting MEMS-directed lasers in there which can draw on the retina, bypassing focussing entirely.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225380</id>
	<title>Where are my contact lense displays?</title>
	<author>Nautical Insanity</author>
	<datestamp>1257174000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't know...I seem to have misplaced them. Shit, I'm blind without my visual overlay.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't know...I seem to have misplaced them .
Shit , I 'm blind without my visual overlay .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't know...I seem to have misplaced them.
Shit, I'm blind without my visual overlay.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225476</id>
	<title>Re:I Seem to Have Misplaced Them ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257174720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What an <b>insightful Slashdot comment</b>, attached to this <b>accurate summary</b> of an <b>original, well-written online tech story</b>.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What an insightful Slashdot comment , attached to this accurate summary of an original , well-written online tech story .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What an insightful Slashdot comment, attached to this accurate summary of an original, well-written online tech story.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225332</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225452</id>
	<title>Re:What could possibly go wrong?</title>
	<author>Scutter</author>
	<datestamp>1257174480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Let us make some Laser emitting diodes and put them behind the eyelids so that they cant even avoid it by closing their eye lids. Wow!  You are en evil genius Dr Parviz.</p></div><p>I promise you that they will be ad-supported as well.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Let us make some Laser emitting diodes and put them behind the eyelids so that they cant even avoid it by closing their eye lids .
Wow ! You are en evil genius Dr Parviz.I promise you that they will be ad-supported as well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let us make some Laser emitting diodes and put them behind the eyelids so that they cant even avoid it by closing their eye lids.
Wow!  You are en evil genius Dr Parviz.I promise you that they will be ad-supported as well.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225402</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30228122</id>
	<title>Re:Half an hour to insert</title>
	<author>csartanis</author>
	<datestamp>1257187860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Man, I feel sorry for you guys.  It really is worth it to learn how to insert and remove them quickly.  What if you get dust in your eyes?</p><p>The way I do it is by looking downward at about a 45 degree angle, using one hand (left hand for left eye, right for right) open my eye really wide and move the lens straight towards it on my index finger.  I have soft lenses which trap air underneath initially, so I use my index finger to move it around until the bubbles escape.  I guess some people can't stand to actually touch their eyeball, but I'm so used to it that I don't even have the urge to blink anymore.  Takes no time at all, and the less touching of the lens you do the less chance of getting dust or dirt on it and having to try again.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Man , I feel sorry for you guys .
It really is worth it to learn how to insert and remove them quickly .
What if you get dust in your eyes ? The way I do it is by looking downward at about a 45 degree angle , using one hand ( left hand for left eye , right for right ) open my eye really wide and move the lens straight towards it on my index finger .
I have soft lenses which trap air underneath initially , so I use my index finger to move it around until the bubbles escape .
I guess some people ca n't stand to actually touch their eyeball , but I 'm so used to it that I do n't even have the urge to blink anymore .
Takes no time at all , and the less touching of the lens you do the less chance of getting dust or dirt on it and having to try again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Man, I feel sorry for you guys.
It really is worth it to learn how to insert and remove them quickly.
What if you get dust in your eyes?The way I do it is by looking downward at about a 45 degree angle, using one hand (left hand for left eye, right for right) open my eye really wide and move the lens straight towards it on my index finger.
I have soft lenses which trap air underneath initially, so I use my index finger to move it around until the bubbles escape.
I guess some people can't stand to actually touch their eyeball, but I'm so used to it that I don't even have the urge to blink anymore.
Takes no time at all, and the less touching of the lens you do the less chance of getting dust or dirt on it and having to try again.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225774</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30242758</id>
	<title>Re:Where Are Your Contact Lens Displays?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259258700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In that last link, some guy has posted a comment with some more dupes:<br><a href="http://science.slashdot.org/story/09/09/01/1619248/Augmented-Reality-In-a-Contact-Lens" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">Augmented Reality In a Contact Lens</a> [slashdot.org]<br><a href="http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/01/17/1921217" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">Bionic Contact Lens May Lead to Overlay Displays</a> [slashdot.org]<br><a href="http://ask.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/04/13/1719225" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">Contact Lenses for Computer Professionals?</a> [slashdot.org]<br><a href="http://science.slashdot.org/science/08/01/17/1921217.shtml" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">Bionic Contact Lens May Lead to Overlay Displays</a> [slashdot.org]<br><a href="http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/08/12/159248" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">Smart Contact Lenses</a> [slashdot.org]<br><a href="http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/05/03/0420236&amp;from=rss" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">Permormance-Enhancing Contact Lenses</a> [slashdot.org]</p><p>And for the recursive obssesed folks, there's:<br><a href="http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/11/25/1316235" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">Where Are Your Contact Lens Displays?</a> [slashdot.org] </p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In that last link , some guy has posted a comment with some more dupes : Augmented Reality In a Contact Lens [ slashdot.org ] Bionic Contact Lens May Lead to Overlay Displays [ slashdot.org ] Contact Lenses for Computer Professionals ?
[ slashdot.org ] Bionic Contact Lens May Lead to Overlay Displays [ slashdot.org ] Smart Contact Lenses [ slashdot.org ] Permormance-Enhancing Contact Lenses [ slashdot.org ] And for the recursive obssesed folks , there 's : Where Are Your Contact Lens Displays ?
[ slashdot.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In that last link, some guy has posted a comment with some more dupes:Augmented Reality In a Contact Lens [slashdot.org]Bionic Contact Lens May Lead to Overlay Displays [slashdot.org]Contact Lenses for Computer Professionals?
[slashdot.org]Bionic Contact Lens May Lead to Overlay Displays [slashdot.org]Smart Contact Lenses [slashdot.org]Permormance-Enhancing Contact Lenses [slashdot.org]And for the recursive obssesed folks, there's:Where Are Your Contact Lens Displays?
[slashdot.org] </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225524</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30228894</id>
	<title>Not how the eye works?</title>
	<author>GnomeChompsky</author>
	<datestamp>1257191340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I guess it would work ok if the display were constantly changing, but static images on the retina fade pretty quickly. You might not notice it, but your eye is constantly moving (this is called saccadic movement) so that you keep being able to see things. Otherwise, you're not going to be able to see the stuff on these displays, because it will fade from vision like the blood vessels between your retina and your cornea.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I guess it would work ok if the display were constantly changing , but static images on the retina fade pretty quickly .
You might not notice it , but your eye is constantly moving ( this is called saccadic movement ) so that you keep being able to see things .
Otherwise , you 're not going to be able to see the stuff on these displays , because it will fade from vision like the blood vessels between your retina and your cornea .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I guess it would work ok if the display were constantly changing, but static images on the retina fade pretty quickly.
You might not notice it, but your eye is constantly moving (this is called saccadic movement) so that you keep being able to see things.
Otherwise, you're not going to be able to see the stuff on these displays, because it will fade from vision like the blood vessels between your retina and your cornea.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30287100</id>
	<title>Re:I Seem to Have Misplaced Them ...</title>
	<author>kalirion</author>
	<datestamp>1259698440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Automated land-cars would seem a more practical and safe approach (similar to the automated cars in the I, Robot movie.)  Synchronized movement to avoid rubber-band stops and starts and traffic jams.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Automated land-cars would seem a more practical and safe approach ( similar to the automated cars in the I , Robot movie .
) Synchronized movement to avoid rubber-band stops and starts and traffic jams .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Automated land-cars would seem a more practical and safe approach (similar to the automated cars in the I, Robot movie.
)  Synchronized movement to avoid rubber-band stops and starts and traffic jams.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225950</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30232002</id>
	<title>Re:How do you look at specific things with them?</title>
	<author>gemada</author>
	<datestamp>1257166980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I don't have contacts, but from what i understand, they center on your cornea and move with your eye, right?


How would someone "look around" on a screen with contacts? Wouldn't the center of the screen always be what you're looking at, drastically minimizing what you can read and properly make out?</p></div><p>Hey, nobody said that you would be able to WALK while wearing them.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't have contacts , but from what i understand , they center on your cornea and move with your eye , right ?
How would someone " look around " on a screen with contacts ?
Would n't the center of the screen always be what you 're looking at , drastically minimizing what you can read and properly make out ? Hey , nobody said that you would be able to WALK while wearing them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't have contacts, but from what i understand, they center on your cornea and move with your eye, right?
How would someone "look around" on a screen with contacts?
Wouldn't the center of the screen always be what you're looking at, drastically minimizing what you can read and properly make out?Hey, nobody said that you would be able to WALK while wearing them.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225920</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225788</id>
	<title>The Future Is Here</title>
	<author>Phat\_Tony</author>
	<datestamp>1257176640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>When I mentioned the idea of contact-lens displays in a <a href="http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1030141&amp;cid=25765807" title="slashdot.org">comment</a> [slashdot.org] one year ago, I referred to them as "the magical world of tomorrow." I guess the future is coming sooner than I thought.</htmltext>
<tokenext>When I mentioned the idea of contact-lens displays in a comment [ slashdot.org ] one year ago , I referred to them as " the magical world of tomorrow .
" I guess the future is coming sooner than I thought .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When I mentioned the idea of contact-lens displays in a comment [slashdot.org] one year ago, I referred to them as "the magical world of tomorrow.
" I guess the future is coming sooner than I thought.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30229670</id>
	<title>You'll get the perfect image...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257194880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>...at only a slight disadvantage: you only see the perfect image once.<br>
<br>
??<br>
<br>
Profit !</htmltext>
<tokenext>...at only a slight disadvantage : you only see the perfect image once .
? ? Profit !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...at only a slight disadvantage: you only see the perfect image once.
??

Profit !</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30226124</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225600</id>
	<title>Re:Visible from the outside?</title>
	<author>TheRaven64</author>
	<datestamp>1257175320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Do people use retina scans anymore?  I thought that they had been replace with iris scans, which are easier to do and can also use rapidly varying light patterns to test pupil dilation, which is much harder to fake than a static pattern.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do people use retina scans anymore ?
I thought that they had been replace with iris scans , which are easier to do and can also use rapidly varying light patterns to test pupil dilation , which is much harder to fake than a static pattern .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do people use retina scans anymore?
I thought that they had been replace with iris scans, which are easier to do and can also use rapidly varying light patterns to test pupil dilation, which is much harder to fake than a static pattern.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30228252</id>
	<title>Re:I Seem to Have Misplaced Them ...</title>
	<author>kindbud</author>
	<datestamp>1257188520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>It would also take an attitude adjustment on people's parts. </i></p><p>Yeah, this is the part forecasters of the future always forget to take into account.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It would also take an attitude adjustment on people 's parts .
Yeah , this is the part forecasters of the future always forget to take into account .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It would also take an attitude adjustment on people's parts.
Yeah, this is the part forecasters of the future always forget to take into account.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225950</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225958</id>
	<title>Completely impractical</title>
	<author>Alsace</author>
	<datestamp>1257177600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>How do you focus on one side of the graph than the other? If you move your eyeball to the left to focus so does the image move to the left. You will not be able to shake your focus off the center of the image. If you have great periphery that may be fine, but only if you are stupid.</htmltext>
<tokenext>How do you focus on one side of the graph than the other ?
If you move your eyeball to the left to focus so does the image move to the left .
You will not be able to shake your focus off the center of the image .
If you have great periphery that may be fine , but only if you are stupid .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How do you focus on one side of the graph than the other?
If you move your eyeball to the left to focus so does the image move to the left.
You will not be able to shake your focus off the center of the image.
If you have great periphery that may be fine, but only if you are stupid.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30227406</id>
	<title>Re:No contacts, please</title>
	<author>thesandtiger</author>
	<datestamp>1257184680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They're expensive because they can be, I guess - and the market is limited. As was said by someone else, most people don't want to walk around with freaky solid black eyes, and for most people the added expense just isn't worth it - no real performance gain for them.</p><p>I've got the transitions lenses in my regular glasses, and actually, the change is gradual enough that my eyes still get a workout from sudden changes (inside to outside). It really doesn't seem to be mechanically different from putting on sunglasses; the main advantage I've found is that whereas before I would frequently forget my sunglasses or lose them, now I don't worry about it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They 're expensive because they can be , I guess - and the market is limited .
As was said by someone else , most people do n't want to walk around with freaky solid black eyes , and for most people the added expense just is n't worth it - no real performance gain for them.I 've got the transitions lenses in my regular glasses , and actually , the change is gradual enough that my eyes still get a workout from sudden changes ( inside to outside ) .
It really does n't seem to be mechanically different from putting on sunglasses ; the main advantage I 've found is that whereas before I would frequently forget my sunglasses or lose them , now I do n't worry about it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They're expensive because they can be, I guess - and the market is limited.
As was said by someone else, most people don't want to walk around with freaky solid black eyes, and for most people the added expense just isn't worth it - no real performance gain for them.I've got the transitions lenses in my regular glasses, and actually, the change is gradual enough that my eyes still get a workout from sudden changes (inside to outside).
It really doesn't seem to be mechanically different from putting on sunglasses; the main advantage I've found is that whereas before I would frequently forget my sunglasses or lose them, now I don't worry about it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225816</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30228614</id>
	<title>Re:No contacts, please</title>
	<author>Dr\_Barnowl</author>
	<datestamp>1257190260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In a similar vein, I take the opposite view of corrective lenses ; I actually wear glasses that are the inverse of those an optician would prescribe. I noticed that my distance vision gets worse when I read screens and paper for long hours, so reasoning that this was the source of the problem I bought a pair of cheap pharmacy +1.0 reading glasses to wear while I work. This moves the apparent focal point of my screens further away and results in less deterioration of my distance vision.</p><p>The optician wanted to give me glasses to correct my distance vision. This wouldn't have made my problem any better and would probably eventually help it get worse. Of course, an optician has no incentive to reduce your need for glasses.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In a similar vein , I take the opposite view of corrective lenses ; I actually wear glasses that are the inverse of those an optician would prescribe .
I noticed that my distance vision gets worse when I read screens and paper for long hours , so reasoning that this was the source of the problem I bought a pair of cheap pharmacy + 1.0 reading glasses to wear while I work .
This moves the apparent focal point of my screens further away and results in less deterioration of my distance vision.The optician wanted to give me glasses to correct my distance vision .
This would n't have made my problem any better and would probably eventually help it get worse .
Of course , an optician has no incentive to reduce your need for glasses .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In a similar vein, I take the opposite view of corrective lenses ; I actually wear glasses that are the inverse of those an optician would prescribe.
I noticed that my distance vision gets worse when I read screens and paper for long hours, so reasoning that this was the source of the problem I bought a pair of cheap pharmacy +1.0 reading glasses to wear while I work.
This moves the apparent focal point of my screens further away and results in less deterioration of my distance vision.The optician wanted to give me glasses to correct my distance vision.
This wouldn't have made my problem any better and would probably eventually help it get worse.
Of course, an optician has no incentive to reduce your need for glasses.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225816</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225540</id>
	<title>yawn</title>
	<author>jDeepbeep</author>
	<datestamp>1257175020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Wake me up when any of these concepts move to market (and at a price point I can afford).</htmltext>
<tokenext>Wake me up when any of these concepts move to market ( and at a price point I can afford ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wake me up when any of these concepts move to market (and at a price point I can afford).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30229232</id>
	<title>Re:I Seem to Have Misplaced Them ...</title>
	<author>evilWurst</author>
	<datestamp>1257192840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; If the population grows, the flying car has to happen one day, because the roads just get too congested otherwise.</p><p>I'm not sure that's exactly the right solution, actually. (Mainly, I'm thinking that congestion in 3D is even more complex and dangerous than congestion in our current 1.5D. Both are easy when you're the only one on/in the road/sky, but there are more variables to manage in the sky crowd than on the road crowd). Flying cars are also impractical for energy reasons; if we're already using too much energy on cars and afraid that greater car ownership will make this worse, then *flying* car ownership will take this to new levels of energy extravagance. If we want to take to the air, we'd need to do it with something more like a flying bus that takes relative large loads of people between a relatively small number of stations. Then we have a crack at energy efficiency gains, space efficiency gains, and keeping the number of vehicles aloft (and the complexity of their routes) simple enough to be manageable.</p><p>But yes, we have a scaling problem as population density increases. We build on areas (scaling quadratically, then), and then as we start building up and down we're building in volumes (scaling kinda cubically). But roads area linear. People flow in toward the center, or need to go through the center, and it jams. The current solution is to try to channel people into highways that go around, to minimize time spent in the center, but that is a bandaid and requires everyone to use a lot more foresight in picking their route - and since it makes the trip longer, it's only enforced by negative feedback (try the middle first, only go around if it's already jammed... but by then it's too late, isn't it?). I think our mid-term solutions (until we can build a reliable flying bus) lie in implementations of some older ideas:</p><p>1) multi-level roads. Yeah, it's kind of the 1950s' vision of the future. In practical use, we already have elevated light rail, buried subways, and some new highway interchange hubs are stacked like 6 levels high. In a city, you'd probably want a stack like that at the center to manage the through-highways, and you'd want the ground-level roads to have a lot of clearance and width, because you'd want all the heavy vehicles to use the ground routes. Then you'd want the next tier(s) up to be for light city vehicles... private people commuting around in something like electric Smart cars and 4-6 passenger variants. The high tiers would be narrower and slower-traveling, of course, but less congested because all the delivery trucks and buses and dump trucks are below. You'd also be able to do different parking garage designs since you'd have multiple floors with road access.</p><p>Mostly, the extra tiers will only be in the densest city core, so that road area scales up more closely with population/traffic density. But the idea is that it'll work out better for both people living in the city and for people coming and going.</p><p>2) skyways for pedestrian travel. Some city cores also have already partly implemented this, such that a few big malls and hotels and convention centers and stadiums are all linked up and you can walk between them without getting rained/snowed on or hit by crazed taxi cabbies. It's equally effective to have these a few floors above ground or below ground, and it's also possible to have a few high traffic areas be powered conveyor belt type walkways like those we've already seen connecting airport terminals. Your routine can then be drive in ONCE, park ONCE, walk/conveyer around through your errands, get back in car and drive home ONCE. As opposed to the present day juggling act of cruise around for parking, park, do task, cruise more, park again, do task, and so on. Vastly less road use needed if implemented cleanly. It requires people to walk more, but we know from our European brethren that walking won't kill you, and IMO more Americans would walk if there was a clean, dry, non-dangerous route available, especially if it meant we could avoid a stressf</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; If the population grows , the flying car has to happen one day , because the roads just get too congested otherwise.I 'm not sure that 's exactly the right solution , actually .
( Mainly , I 'm thinking that congestion in 3D is even more complex and dangerous than congestion in our current 1.5D .
Both are easy when you 're the only one on/in the road/sky , but there are more variables to manage in the sky crowd than on the road crowd ) .
Flying cars are also impractical for energy reasons ; if we 're already using too much energy on cars and afraid that greater car ownership will make this worse , then * flying * car ownership will take this to new levels of energy extravagance .
If we want to take to the air , we 'd need to do it with something more like a flying bus that takes relative large loads of people between a relatively small number of stations .
Then we have a crack at energy efficiency gains , space efficiency gains , and keeping the number of vehicles aloft ( and the complexity of their routes ) simple enough to be manageable.But yes , we have a scaling problem as population density increases .
We build on areas ( scaling quadratically , then ) , and then as we start building up and down we 're building in volumes ( scaling kinda cubically ) .
But roads area linear .
People flow in toward the center , or need to go through the center , and it jams .
The current solution is to try to channel people into highways that go around , to minimize time spent in the center , but that is a bandaid and requires everyone to use a lot more foresight in picking their route - and since it makes the trip longer , it 's only enforced by negative feedback ( try the middle first , only go around if it 's already jammed... but by then it 's too late , is n't it ? ) .
I think our mid-term solutions ( until we can build a reliable flying bus ) lie in implementations of some older ideas : 1 ) multi-level roads .
Yeah , it 's kind of the 1950s ' vision of the future .
In practical use , we already have elevated light rail , buried subways , and some new highway interchange hubs are stacked like 6 levels high .
In a city , you 'd probably want a stack like that at the center to manage the through-highways , and you 'd want the ground-level roads to have a lot of clearance and width , because you 'd want all the heavy vehicles to use the ground routes .
Then you 'd want the next tier ( s ) up to be for light city vehicles... private people commuting around in something like electric Smart cars and 4-6 passenger variants .
The high tiers would be narrower and slower-traveling , of course , but less congested because all the delivery trucks and buses and dump trucks are below .
You 'd also be able to do different parking garage designs since you 'd have multiple floors with road access.Mostly , the extra tiers will only be in the densest city core , so that road area scales up more closely with population/traffic density .
But the idea is that it 'll work out better for both people living in the city and for people coming and going.2 ) skyways for pedestrian travel .
Some city cores also have already partly implemented this , such that a few big malls and hotels and convention centers and stadiums are all linked up and you can walk between them without getting rained/snowed on or hit by crazed taxi cabbies .
It 's equally effective to have these a few floors above ground or below ground , and it 's also possible to have a few high traffic areas be powered conveyor belt type walkways like those we 've already seen connecting airport terminals .
Your routine can then be drive in ONCE , park ONCE , walk/conveyer around through your errands , get back in car and drive home ONCE .
As opposed to the present day juggling act of cruise around for parking , park , do task , cruise more , park again , do task , and so on .
Vastly less road use needed if implemented cleanly .
It requires people to walk more , but we know from our European brethren that walking wo n't kill you , and IMO more Americans would walk if there was a clean , dry , non-dangerous route available , especially if it meant we could avoid a stressf</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; If the population grows, the flying car has to happen one day, because the roads just get too congested otherwise.I'm not sure that's exactly the right solution, actually.
(Mainly, I'm thinking that congestion in 3D is even more complex and dangerous than congestion in our current 1.5D.
Both are easy when you're the only one on/in the road/sky, but there are more variables to manage in the sky crowd than on the road crowd).
Flying cars are also impractical for energy reasons; if we're already using too much energy on cars and afraid that greater car ownership will make this worse, then *flying* car ownership will take this to new levels of energy extravagance.
If we want to take to the air, we'd need to do it with something more like a flying bus that takes relative large loads of people between a relatively small number of stations.
Then we have a crack at energy efficiency gains, space efficiency gains, and keeping the number of vehicles aloft (and the complexity of their routes) simple enough to be manageable.But yes, we have a scaling problem as population density increases.
We build on areas (scaling quadratically, then), and then as we start building up and down we're building in volumes (scaling kinda cubically).
But roads area linear.
People flow in toward the center, or need to go through the center, and it jams.
The current solution is to try to channel people into highways that go around, to minimize time spent in the center, but that is a bandaid and requires everyone to use a lot more foresight in picking their route - and since it makes the trip longer, it's only enforced by negative feedback (try the middle first, only go around if it's already jammed... but by then it's too late, isn't it?).
I think our mid-term solutions (until we can build a reliable flying bus) lie in implementations of some older ideas:1) multi-level roads.
Yeah, it's kind of the 1950s' vision of the future.
In practical use, we already have elevated light rail, buried subways, and some new highway interchange hubs are stacked like 6 levels high.
In a city, you'd probably want a stack like that at the center to manage the through-highways, and you'd want the ground-level roads to have a lot of clearance and width, because you'd want all the heavy vehicles to use the ground routes.
Then you'd want the next tier(s) up to be for light city vehicles... private people commuting around in something like electric Smart cars and 4-6 passenger variants.
The high tiers would be narrower and slower-traveling, of course, but less congested because all the delivery trucks and buses and dump trucks are below.
You'd also be able to do different parking garage designs since you'd have multiple floors with road access.Mostly, the extra tiers will only be in the densest city core, so that road area scales up more closely with population/traffic density.
But the idea is that it'll work out better for both people living in the city and for people coming and going.2) skyways for pedestrian travel.
Some city cores also have already partly implemented this, such that a few big malls and hotels and convention centers and stadiums are all linked up and you can walk between them without getting rained/snowed on or hit by crazed taxi cabbies.
It's equally effective to have these a few floors above ground or below ground, and it's also possible to have a few high traffic areas be powered conveyor belt type walkways like those we've already seen connecting airport terminals.
Your routine can then be drive in ONCE, park ONCE, walk/conveyer around through your errands, get back in car and drive home ONCE.
As opposed to the present day juggling act of cruise around for parking, park, do task, cruise more, park again, do task, and so on.
Vastly less road use needed if implemented cleanly.
It requires people to walk more, but we know from our European brethren that walking won't kill you, and IMO more Americans would walk if there was a clean, dry, non-dangerous route available, especially if it meant we could avoid a stressf</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225950</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30227256</id>
	<title>Re:The ultimate adware</title>
	<author>grimJester</author>
	<datestamp>1257183840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Not as bad as two-way computer-brain communication. If you have popup ads in your field of vision it's annoying, but if it works as an extra sense you probably can't distinguish advertising from your own opinions. Kinda like politics works now.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Not as bad as two-way computer-brain communication .
If you have popup ads in your field of vision it 's annoying , but if it works as an extra sense you probably ca n't distinguish advertising from your own opinions .
Kinda like politics works now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not as bad as two-way computer-brain communication.
If you have popup ads in your field of vision it's annoying, but if it works as an extra sense you probably can't distinguish advertising from your own opinions.
Kinda like politics works now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225556</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30229368</id>
	<title>They fix everything.</title>
	<author>hrimhari</author>
	<datestamp>1257193440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Robocop vision for the masses!! Sweeeeeet...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Robocop vision for the masses ! !
Sweeeeeet.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Robocop vision for the masses!!
Sweeeeeet...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30228604</id>
	<title>Where are the decent Head Mounted Displays?</title>
	<author>MrSteveSD</author>
	<datestamp>1257190260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Let's take a step back from the idea of contact lens displays to the lower-tech idea of wearable Head Mounted Displays. Where are they? It's been 20 or more years since the promise of Virtual Reality and yet I still can't go into the average computer store and by some VR goggles. You can buy them on-line of course but frankly they are awful. Most of them have low resolution and a field of view equivalent to a 14 inch monitor on your desk (cunningly advertised as being equivalent to 70 inch screen at 10 feet).
<br>
<br>
Field of view is really the most important thing for an immersive experience, not the 3D aspect. Imagine the impressive view you would get looking out from the top of a mountain. There is no useful 3D information in the scene since everything is too far away, but it certainly wouldn't feel fake despite the lack of 3D. If you look at the same mountain view through a tiny window though, suddenly you are now longer "there", and it just becomes a picture of a mountain view. That's the dire experience you get from today's narrow field of view. Even the super expensive HMDs that cost as much as a house do not provide a normal human field of view.
<br>
<br>
I think the problem is that there is no real drive to bring virtual reality to the consumer market. Companies are far too comfortable making games designed to be played on a low field of view window on the world that never moves. If one of the major console makers pushed the idea of VR, it might change things. I won't hold my breath though. I've been waiting 20 years for VR and there is just no will there to go with the idea despite all the technical advances we have made.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Let 's take a step back from the idea of contact lens displays to the lower-tech idea of wearable Head Mounted Displays .
Where are they ?
It 's been 20 or more years since the promise of Virtual Reality and yet I still ca n't go into the average computer store and by some VR goggles .
You can buy them on-line of course but frankly they are awful .
Most of them have low resolution and a field of view equivalent to a 14 inch monitor on your desk ( cunningly advertised as being equivalent to 70 inch screen at 10 feet ) .
Field of view is really the most important thing for an immersive experience , not the 3D aspect .
Imagine the impressive view you would get looking out from the top of a mountain .
There is no useful 3D information in the scene since everything is too far away , but it certainly would n't feel fake despite the lack of 3D .
If you look at the same mountain view through a tiny window though , suddenly you are now longer " there " , and it just becomes a picture of a mountain view .
That 's the dire experience you get from today 's narrow field of view .
Even the super expensive HMDs that cost as much as a house do not provide a normal human field of view .
I think the problem is that there is no real drive to bring virtual reality to the consumer market .
Companies are far too comfortable making games designed to be played on a low field of view window on the world that never moves .
If one of the major console makers pushed the idea of VR , it might change things .
I wo n't hold my breath though .
I 've been waiting 20 years for VR and there is just no will there to go with the idea despite all the technical advances we have made .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let's take a step back from the idea of contact lens displays to the lower-tech idea of wearable Head Mounted Displays.
Where are they?
It's been 20 or more years since the promise of Virtual Reality and yet I still can't go into the average computer store and by some VR goggles.
You can buy them on-line of course but frankly they are awful.
Most of them have low resolution and a field of view equivalent to a 14 inch monitor on your desk (cunningly advertised as being equivalent to 70 inch screen at 10 feet).
Field of view is really the most important thing for an immersive experience, not the 3D aspect.
Imagine the impressive view you would get looking out from the top of a mountain.
There is no useful 3D information in the scene since everything is too far away, but it certainly wouldn't feel fake despite the lack of 3D.
If you look at the same mountain view through a tiny window though, suddenly you are now longer "there", and it just becomes a picture of a mountain view.
That's the dire experience you get from today's narrow field of view.
Even the super expensive HMDs that cost as much as a house do not provide a normal human field of view.
I think the problem is that there is no real drive to bring virtual reality to the consumer market.
Companies are far too comfortable making games designed to be played on a low field of view window on the world that never moves.
If one of the major console makers pushed the idea of VR, it might change things.
I won't hold my breath though.
I've been waiting 20 years for VR and there is just no will there to go with the idea despite all the technical advances we have made.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225460</id>
	<title>Re:What could possibly go wrong?</title>
	<author>mschirmer</author>
	<datestamp>1257174540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Could you imagine the possibilities? *wink wink*<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.. You've bored at work, so you close your eyes and voila, a peep show all to yourself! No need to leave the office!</p><p>Wait... I'll be back. I have to go pull my mind out of the gutter.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Could you imagine the possibilities ?
* wink wink * .. You 've bored at work , so you close your eyes and voila , a peep show all to yourself !
No need to leave the office ! Wait... I 'll be back .
I have to go pull my mind out of the gutter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Could you imagine the possibilities?
*wink wink* .. You've bored at work, so you close your eyes and voila, a peep show all to yourself!
No need to leave the office!Wait... I'll be back.
I have to go pull my mind out of the gutter.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225402</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30228486</id>
	<title>Re:Focus? Doesn't happen!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257189780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Thank you. I've been wondering when someone would figure this out.</p><p>You can't scratch a letter onto the surface of a 35mm lens and expect that letter to show up on the film. It doesn't. It's in the wrong part of the light path.</p><p>You couldn't paint a letter onto the front of an eyeball and expect it to form an image on the retina. It won't. It's in the wrong part of the light path.</p><p>You could probably blink a red LED or a green one or a yellow one, and that might be useful. If your contact lens  could \_project\_ light onto the retina, or out onto a surface, sure it would work. But it's near impossible to \_project\_ a focused, sharp image out of a structure less than a tenth of a mm thick.</p><p>None of the articles I've read have ever addressed this point.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Thank you .
I 've been wondering when someone would figure this out.You ca n't scratch a letter onto the surface of a 35mm lens and expect that letter to show up on the film .
It does n't .
It 's in the wrong part of the light path.You could n't paint a letter onto the front of an eyeball and expect it to form an image on the retina .
It wo n't .
It 's in the wrong part of the light path.You could probably blink a red LED or a green one or a yellow one , and that might be useful .
If your contact lens could \ _project \ _ light onto the retina , or out onto a surface , sure it would work .
But it 's near impossible to \ _project \ _ a focused , sharp image out of a structure less than a tenth of a mm thick.None of the articles I 've read have ever addressed this point .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thank you.
I've been wondering when someone would figure this out.You can't scratch a letter onto the surface of a 35mm lens and expect that letter to show up on the film.
It doesn't.
It's in the wrong part of the light path.You couldn't paint a letter onto the front of an eyeball and expect it to form an image on the retina.
It won't.
It's in the wrong part of the light path.You could probably blink a red LED or a green one or a yellow one, and that might be useful.
If your contact lens  could \_project\_ light onto the retina, or out onto a surface, sure it would work.
But it's near impossible to \_project\_ a focused, sharp image out of a structure less than a tenth of a mm thick.None of the articles I've read have ever addressed this point.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225518</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225642</id>
	<title>When they happen, it will be amazing</title>
	<author>thesandtiger</author>
	<datestamp>1257175620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm really excited about the future of augmented reality and augmented senses. I'd love to see enhancements for all our senses. The visual possibilities are obvious (facial recognition, distance calculation, displaying overlay information about whatever you're looking at), but the other senses are equally exciting:</p><p>Hearing: Augment my hearing so that when I'm in the dark I can have a sonar type display projected onto my eyes. Night vision is cool, but it still requires some light, and can be baffled by smoke - sonar would let people "see" in situations where they otherwise wouldn't. Throw in some filters, also - I'm listening to music while on a train, noise cancellation would be nice. I hear a snippet of song on the radio and want to know what it is - my new ears will recognize the song and tell me the name (and probably let me get it from iTunes or whatever right then, if I want).</p><p>Smell &amp; Taste: For emergency services workers, it'd be great if they had a way of knowing what was in the air in a dangerous environment. Augmented smell would let them do that, or allow humans to sense other things that currently are too subtle for us to detect. There's been some work with dogs that could smell cancer - it'd be an interesting diagnostic tool to add smell to a quick medical scan. Or for foodies, we could take a bite of something and instantly be shown what's in it and in what proportion.</p><p>Touch: I'd just like to see something that would let me run my fingers over a surface and then translate that into visuals.</p><p>Obviously, all of this (and more) could be turned on/turned off by the user to make it unobtrusive if they wanted, and certainly there would be privacy issues.</p><p>One thing I do wonder about is how our brains would cope with being supported in this fashion - I know that my memory for things like phone numbers has gone to shit since I've begun using a cellphone, and while I'm much better at figuring out how to find information than I used to be, thanks to Google, I'm also a lot worse at keeping random facts in my head. What will happen to a generation of people raised without having to engage in tasks like having to remember people's names/faces/details? It could be interesting.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm really excited about the future of augmented reality and augmented senses .
I 'd love to see enhancements for all our senses .
The visual possibilities are obvious ( facial recognition , distance calculation , displaying overlay information about whatever you 're looking at ) , but the other senses are equally exciting : Hearing : Augment my hearing so that when I 'm in the dark I can have a sonar type display projected onto my eyes .
Night vision is cool , but it still requires some light , and can be baffled by smoke - sonar would let people " see " in situations where they otherwise would n't .
Throw in some filters , also - I 'm listening to music while on a train , noise cancellation would be nice .
I hear a snippet of song on the radio and want to know what it is - my new ears will recognize the song and tell me the name ( and probably let me get it from iTunes or whatever right then , if I want ) .Smell &amp; Taste : For emergency services workers , it 'd be great if they had a way of knowing what was in the air in a dangerous environment .
Augmented smell would let them do that , or allow humans to sense other things that currently are too subtle for us to detect .
There 's been some work with dogs that could smell cancer - it 'd be an interesting diagnostic tool to add smell to a quick medical scan .
Or for foodies , we could take a bite of something and instantly be shown what 's in it and in what proportion.Touch : I 'd just like to see something that would let me run my fingers over a surface and then translate that into visuals.Obviously , all of this ( and more ) could be turned on/turned off by the user to make it unobtrusive if they wanted , and certainly there would be privacy issues.One thing I do wonder about is how our brains would cope with being supported in this fashion - I know that my memory for things like phone numbers has gone to shit since I 've begun using a cellphone , and while I 'm much better at figuring out how to find information than I used to be , thanks to Google , I 'm also a lot worse at keeping random facts in my head .
What will happen to a generation of people raised without having to engage in tasks like having to remember people 's names/faces/details ?
It could be interesting .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm really excited about the future of augmented reality and augmented senses.
I'd love to see enhancements for all our senses.
The visual possibilities are obvious (facial recognition, distance calculation, displaying overlay information about whatever you're looking at), but the other senses are equally exciting:Hearing: Augment my hearing so that when I'm in the dark I can have a sonar type display projected onto my eyes.
Night vision is cool, but it still requires some light, and can be baffled by smoke - sonar would let people "see" in situations where they otherwise wouldn't.
Throw in some filters, also - I'm listening to music while on a train, noise cancellation would be nice.
I hear a snippet of song on the radio and want to know what it is - my new ears will recognize the song and tell me the name (and probably let me get it from iTunes or whatever right then, if I want).Smell &amp; Taste: For emergency services workers, it'd be great if they had a way of knowing what was in the air in a dangerous environment.
Augmented smell would let them do that, or allow humans to sense other things that currently are too subtle for us to detect.
There's been some work with dogs that could smell cancer - it'd be an interesting diagnostic tool to add smell to a quick medical scan.
Or for foodies, we could take a bite of something and instantly be shown what's in it and in what proportion.Touch: I'd just like to see something that would let me run my fingers over a surface and then translate that into visuals.Obviously, all of this (and more) could be turned on/turned off by the user to make it unobtrusive if they wanted, and certainly there would be privacy issues.One thing I do wonder about is how our brains would cope with being supported in this fashion - I know that my memory for things like phone numbers has gone to shit since I've begun using a cellphone, and while I'm much better at figuring out how to find information than I used to be, thanks to Google, I'm also a lot worse at keeping random facts in my head.
What will happen to a generation of people raised without having to engage in tasks like having to remember people's names/faces/details?
It could be interesting.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30226074</id>
	<title>Re:No contacts, please</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257178140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Aside from the inconvenience, I haven't seen the health issues addressed. Mainly, what happens to the human eye when it's not only insulated by a contact lens, but also heated by the 330 microwatts needed to power these things?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Aside from the inconvenience , I have n't seen the health issues addressed .
Mainly , what happens to the human eye when it 's not only insulated by a contact lens , but also heated by the 330 microwatts needed to power these things ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Aside from the inconvenience, I haven't seen the health issues addressed.
Mainly, what happens to the human eye when it's not only insulated by a contact lens, but also heated by the 330 microwatts needed to power these things?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225360</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30227530</id>
	<title>Re:How do you look at specific things with them?</title>
	<author>mace9984</author>
	<datestamp>1257185280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'll hazard a guess here, some type of motion sensor in the hardware would sense the eye moving, the software would then move the image around on the screen, just a guess though...</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'll hazard a guess here , some type of motion sensor in the hardware would sense the eye moving , the software would then move the image around on the screen , just a guess though.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'll hazard a guess here, some type of motion sensor in the hardware would sense the eye moving, the software would then move the image around on the screen, just a guess though...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225920</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30226340</id>
	<title>F16</title>
	<author>troll8901</author>
	<datestamp>1257179460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The TFA has a video clip of a F16 HUD.</p><p>Either the pilot's flying skills are like mine (in a simulator), or he's a top aerobic performer.</p><p>It's hard to hear the engine noise clearly, a real testament to the noise cancellation quality.</p><p>Hmm, he landed perfectly at first try.  He's a real good pilot.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The TFA has a video clip of a F16 HUD.Either the pilot 's flying skills are like mine ( in a simulator ) , or he 's a top aerobic performer.It 's hard to hear the engine noise clearly , a real testament to the noise cancellation quality.Hmm , he landed perfectly at first try .
He 's a real good pilot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The TFA has a video clip of a F16 HUD.Either the pilot's flying skills are like mine (in a simulator), or he's a top aerobic performer.It's hard to hear the engine noise clearly, a real testament to the noise cancellation quality.Hmm, he landed perfectly at first try.
He's a real good pilot.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30231992</id>
	<title>Re:Focus?</title>
	<author>gemada</author>
	<datestamp>1257166920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>think of the sharks!</htmltext>
<tokenext>think of the sharks !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>think of the sharks!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30226124</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30226470</id>
	<title>Beer Goggles?</title>
	<author>TooMad</author>
	<datestamp>1257180000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Make your significant other always look like their youthful self or someone else entirely.  The next step being everyone always looking 'beautiful'.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Make your significant other always look like their youthful self or someone else entirely .
The next step being everyone always looking 'beautiful' .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Make your significant other always look like their youthful self or someone else entirely.
The next step being everyone always looking 'beautiful'.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30227316</id>
	<title>Re:No contacts, please</title>
	<author>L3370</author>
	<datestamp>1257184140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I've read an article on these contacts. They even tailor them to specific sports. The contacts made for golfers enhance the contrast of blue/green colors, so they can better read the lie of the field and which direction the grass is growing. For baseball they try to enhance the contrasts so the red stitching on the baseball pops. I guess they can get a better read on the pitch from this.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've read an article on these contacts .
They even tailor them to specific sports .
The contacts made for golfers enhance the contrast of blue/green colors , so they can better read the lie of the field and which direction the grass is growing .
For baseball they try to enhance the contrasts so the red stitching on the baseball pops .
I guess they can get a better read on the pitch from this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've read an article on these contacts.
They even tailor them to specific sports.
The contacts made for golfers enhance the contrast of blue/green colors, so they can better read the lie of the field and which direction the grass is growing.
For baseball they try to enhance the contrasts so the red stitching on the baseball pops.
I guess they can get a better read on the pitch from this.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225510</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30226214</id>
	<title>actually more like head mounted cueing</title>
	<author>winse</author>
	<datestamp>1257178800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>we'll-use-them-as-huds-in-our-flying-cars dept-</p><p>actually typically HUDS are fixed on the vehicle body (at least in the fighter pilot community).  These would be more like helmet (head) mounted cueing systems present in more modern day such as JHMCS <a href="http://www.vsi-hmcs.com/pages\_hmcs/02\_jhm.html" title="vsi-hmcs.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.vsi-hmcs.com/pages\_hmcs/02\_jhm.html</a> [vsi-hmcs.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>we 'll-use-them-as-huds-in-our-flying-cars dept-actually typically HUDS are fixed on the vehicle body ( at least in the fighter pilot community ) .
These would be more like helmet ( head ) mounted cueing systems present in more modern day such as JHMCS http : //www.vsi-hmcs.com/pages \ _hmcs/02 \ _jhm.html [ vsi-hmcs.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>we'll-use-them-as-huds-in-our-flying-cars dept-actually typically HUDS are fixed on the vehicle body (at least in the fighter pilot community).
These would be more like helmet (head) mounted cueing systems present in more modern day such as JHMCS http://www.vsi-hmcs.com/pages\_hmcs/02\_jhm.html [vsi-hmcs.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225436</id>
	<title>Visible from the outside?</title>
	<author>Rhaban</author>
	<datestamp>1257174360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If I displayed a fullscreen hi-res photo of someone's eye on such a lens, would it pass retina scan?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If I displayed a fullscreen hi-res photo of someone 's eye on such a lens , would it pass retina scan ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I displayed a fullscreen hi-res photo of someone's eye on such a lens, would it pass retina scan?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30226372</id>
	<title>Re:How do you look at specific things with them?</title>
	<author>jeroen94704</author>
	<datestamp>1257179640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Good point.<br>
<br>
Even worse, contacts do not remain at the same spot on the retina. They move about a little bit with each eye-movement and blink. This is ok for a simple lens as long as the actual pupil remains fully covered, but for a screen it would be catastrophic. Imagine your monitor slamming down when you blink, and then slowly work its way back up (which is what a contact does).</htmltext>
<tokenext>Good point .
Even worse , contacts do not remain at the same spot on the retina .
They move about a little bit with each eye-movement and blink .
This is ok for a simple lens as long as the actual pupil remains fully covered , but for a screen it would be catastrophic .
Imagine your monitor slamming down when you blink , and then slowly work its way back up ( which is what a contact does ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Good point.
Even worse, contacts do not remain at the same spot on the retina.
They move about a little bit with each eye-movement and blink.
This is ok for a simple lens as long as the actual pupil remains fully covered, but for a screen it would be catastrophic.
Imagine your monitor slamming down when you blink, and then slowly work its way back up (which is what a contact does).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225920</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_25_1316235_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30226046
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225464
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_25_1316235_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30229302
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225332
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_25_1316235_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30227406
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225816
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225510
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225360
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_25_1316235_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30228486
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225518
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_25_1316235_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30230958
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225950
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225332
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_25_1316235_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30226074
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225360
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_25_1316235_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225452
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225402
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_25_1316235_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30227600
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225360
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_25_1316235_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30228614
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225816
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225510
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225360
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_25_1316235_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30228252
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225950
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225332
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_25_1316235_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30226320
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225518
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_25_1316235_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30232002
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225920
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_25_1316235_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30242716
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30226124
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225518
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_25_1316235_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225942
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225460
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225402
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_25_1316235_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30226058
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225360
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_25_1316235_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225652
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225402
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_25_1316235_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30287100
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225950
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225332
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_25_1316235_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30226372
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225920
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_25_1316235_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30227530
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225920
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_25_1316235_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30227284
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30226124
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225518
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_25_1316235_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30227216
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225816
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225510
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225360
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_25_1316235_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30242758
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225524
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_25_1316235_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30229670
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30226124
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225518
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_25_1316235_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30226246
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225332
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_25_1316235_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30229800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225402
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_25_1316235_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30227434
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225816
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225510
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225360
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_25_1316235_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30228642
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225360
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_25_1316235_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30227256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225556
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_25_1316235_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225848
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225570
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_25_1316235_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225768
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225518
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_25_1316235_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30227748
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225360
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_25_1316235_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30228122
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225774
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225464
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_25_1316235_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30226060
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225360
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_25_1316235_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30228468
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225402
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_25_1316235_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225476
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225332
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_25_1316235_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225600
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225436
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_25_1316235_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30227316
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225510
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225360
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_25_1316235_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30226082
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225464
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_25_1316235_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30231992
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30226124
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225518
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_25_1316235_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30229232
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225950
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225332
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_25_1316235_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30227436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225518
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_25_1316235.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225402
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30229800
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30228468
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225652
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225460
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225942
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225452
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_25_1316235.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225570
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225848
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_25_1316235.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225360
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30228642
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30227600
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30226060
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30227748
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30226058
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225510
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30227316
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225816
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30228614
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30227406
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30227434
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30227216
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30226074
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_25_1316235.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225556
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30227256
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_25_1316235.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30227350
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_25_1316235.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225920
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30227530
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30226372
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30232002
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_25_1316235.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225524
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30242758
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_25_1316235.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225436
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225600
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_25_1316235.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225642
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_25_1316235.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30226022
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_25_1316235.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225464
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30226082
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30226046
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225774
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30228122
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_25_1316235.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30226470
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_25_1316235.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30227054
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_25_1316235.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225518
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30226320
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30228486
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30227436
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30226124
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30231992
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30227284
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30229670
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30242716
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225768
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_25_1316235.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225332
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225476
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30226246
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225950
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30228252
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30287100
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30230958
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30229232
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30229302
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_25_1316235.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225540
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_25_1316235.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30225554
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_25_1316235.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_25_1316235.30228894
</commentlist>
</conversation>
