Skip to comments.
Scientists Plan to Shake Hands Via Internet
reuters.com ^
| October 28, 2002 06:04 PM ET
| Reuters
Posted on 10/28/2002 3:34:05 PM PST by Nachum
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60 next last
To: PJ-Comix
Actually we've already seen Step 2 in a movie---Sleeper. Remember?LOL! A Woody Allen classic!
BTW, loved your # 19. An uplifting post!
To: Nachum
If successful, it could allow people to touch and feel each other over the Internet. I can foresee a huge surge in telecommunications stocks if this became widely available .. :)
To: Nachum
"You can not only feel the resulting force, but you can also get a sense of the quality of the object you're feeling -- whether it's soft or hard, wood-like or fleshy."
Hmmmm....
23
posted on
10/28/2002 4:34:44 PM PST
by
aruanan
To: Nachum
Think what this will do for the sex trade!
24
posted on
10/28/2002 4:36:58 PM PST
by
IronJack
To: Nachum
In a technological first, they will use pencil-like devices called phantoms to recreate the sense of touch across the Atlantic... OH GOD, I knew this was coming! (oops sorry for the pun)
Actually I thought of this a few years ago and might have considered trying to patent it but it seemed too scummy.
Man connects with prostitute in south east asia, they both strap on their touch devices, and well you know the rest...
I am sure this technology is coming, oops, will arrive, soon to a computer store near you.
To: DakotaGator
Here is a list of people I would like to "touch" with this gizmo:
1. Petra Verkaik (obviously)
2. Wonder Woman (mmmmm....)
3. Mary Landrieu (Don't agree with her but she's the Senator I would most like to "touch" via the gizmo.)
4. Beth Ostroski (Just to make Howard Stern jealous.)
5. Salma Hayek (She's going to portray that weird Mexican commie-lib one-eyebrowed artist chick on the big screen but I forgive her.)
6. Sophia Loren (Any way to make the settings of this device so that the chix will feel as they appeared 40 years ago?)
7. Anita Ekberg (See above.)
8. Ursula Andress (As she appeared in "Dr. No")
9. Jennifer Connelly (But only in her pre-anorexiac personna.)
10. All of the Playboy Playmates up to but NOT including the Implant Era.
26
posted on
10/28/2002 4:40:37 PM PST
by
PJ-Comix
To: PJ-Comix
you dont get many of those to a pound
27
posted on
10/28/2002 4:45:32 PM PST
by
al baby
To: PJ-Comix
But how do you know who you would be "touching"? It could be a man, a grandmother, or a computer program.
Sounds like a good way for somebody to make money. That's about all for now.
28
posted on
10/28/2002 4:48:48 PM PST
by
Nachum
To: Nachum
Warning, rather graphic language but
this is all I can think of when I see this.
To: Nachum
This'll give cybersex a whole new meaning.
30
posted on
10/28/2002 4:49:23 PM PST
by
weikel
To: billorites
Exactly! It's just a matter of time.
To: Tennessee_Bob
This is old news, pr0n industry is funding the research....... go figure.
To: weikel
33
posted on
10/28/2002 5:11:55 PM PST
by
ALS
To: Nachum
But how do you know who you would be "touching"? It could be a man, a grandmother, or a computer program. If you can tell whether you are "touching" a man or a woman from the get-go, then you have problems.
34
posted on
10/28/2002 5:14:22 PM PST
by
PJ-Comix
To: Nachum
Oops! Substitue "can't" for "can" in first sentence. Actually I wouldn't mind touching a few "cans."
35
posted on
10/28/2002 5:15:42 PM PST
by
PJ-Comix
To: PJ-Comix
First- I'm happy to see you found one of Petra with enough clothes on to post.
Second - When I purchase a car on the web, I want it to materialize in my garage the exact moment my account is debted. To heck with handshakes and cheap feels. Lets have some serious 21st Century technobable here!!:-)
Thirdly - is a POSTVERT what you become once your preverted ways deminish or is it too perverted to place in a timeline?
What a twisted post! :-)
To: Nachum
ONLY RELEVANT QUESTION:
Who's tax dollars are paying for this stupidity?
37
posted on
10/28/2002 5:24:06 PM PST
by
XLurk
To: XLurk
You think technology is stupid?
And to answer your only relevant question: YOU ARE!
To: XLurk
Who's tax dollars are paying for this stupidity? I don't really see this as stupidity. Aside from the prurient uses, think about long distance surgery. What if someone in orbit got struck by a microscopic meteor? This technology, in combination with those that already exist, would allow a trauma surgeon anywhere with a high-bandwidth connection to see the operating area in 3-D, control all available surgical tools, and feel the wound. The same would apply to those living in extremely rural areas (Western Canada or the Outback, for instance), or those that are so emergent that they wouldn't make it to a hospital (an accident on Everest as an example).
Sounds pretty useful to me.
To: Texaggie79
Porn industry always been a wonderful engine of progress lol.
40
posted on
10/28/2002 5:41:47 PM PST
by
weikel
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson