@raggi not working for a large part of the population is still a design flaw
-
-
Replying to @steveklabnik
@steveklabnik sure, but it's practically much much easier to use a cats-eyes approach. i know you'll disagree with value market decisions...1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @raggi
@raggi@steveklabnik but back when we were deploying it (not this HP camera timeframe), the hardware for CV solutions was too expensive1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @raggi
@raggi@steveklabnik in infrared, white eyes show up as bright dots specific distances apart, and move as pairs. very efficient on CPU1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @raggi
@raggi@steveklabnik it's likely that the cost of deploying a CV based solution is still higher than effective for most..1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @raggi
@raggi@steveklabnik although there are other solutions now that will work, if you read up on siggraph1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @raggi
@raggi@steveklabnik anyway, my point merely is, it may well have been caught before manufacture, but the solution for folks with IR dull...1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @raggi
@raggi@steveklabnik eyes was deemed out of scope for the project due to cost. that's not unreasonable3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @steveklabnik
@steveklabnik put another way, if it doesn't work for everyone, it shouldn't be released?2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.