I like the questions about bad vs good dreams and whether resulting paintings would they'd look very different from each other. I had similar questions. I think GTOlover is right, generally speaking: sleepers tend to get more active during bad dreams, so the painting might have a lot more going on in it than one produced by peaceful sleep.
It seems that some forlks with access to a lot of resources and a lot of time on their hands, got creative. Of course, as in many projects, the creativity is in the algorithm. Unfortunately there is not much clue about the relationship between input and output, and no method of interpretation is offered.
Of course if the initial directive was to find a new way to turn a profit then it is quite reasonable. After all, how in the world could any potential customer claim the translation is incorrect? So it is quite an accomplishment from a business point of view.
Now the elephant that paints pictures with a brush in it's trunk is going to go hungry. Even elephants are not immune to being replaced by technology. I could make the argument that the elephant is painting what I'm thinking and I defy anyone to prove me wrong.
I agree about the interpretation of the data: in fact, that was my first (and second and third...) question to ABB: what were the assumptions in the software design about how motion, temperature and sound sensor data would be interpreted visually? Although I didn't get an answer, it's obvious that you can design it any way you want (more or less). So the applications could be pretty broad.
I know when my wife is having a bad dream, she tends to toss around and mumble. If the data is body sensors and audible, could the software interpret 'erratic' behavior? Or how about erotic behavior? Or most nights, you remember nothing?
Either way, this is cool. Wake up in the morning and see what surprise painting is waiting for you!
Engineers at Fuel Cell Energy have found a way to take advantage of a side reaction, unique to their carbonate fuel cell that has nothing to do with energy production, as a potential, cost-effective solution to capturing carbon from fossil fuel power plants.
To get to a trillion sensors in the IoT that we all look forward to, there are many challenges to commercialization that still remain, including interoperability, the lack of standards, and the issue of security, to name a few.
This is part one of an article discussing the University of Washington’s nationally ranked FSAE electric car (eCar) and combustible car (cCar). Stay tuned for part two, tomorrow, which will discuss the four unique PCBs used in both the eCar and cCars.
Focus on Fundamentals consists of 45-minute on-line classes that cover a host of technologies. You learn without leaving the comfort of your desk. All classes are taught by subject-matter experts and all are archived. So if you can't attend live, attend at your convenience.