3 ms·
The actual paper is available [pdf]: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2020.05.054 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2020.05.054 [Edit] Notes: • People tested hav
by kps 6y ago
The actual paper is available [pdf]: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2020.05.054 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2020.05.054
[Edit] Notes:
• People tested have all 3 cones but reduced function of one type (‘anomolous trichromats’) — either green (‘deuteranomoly’) or red (‘protoanomoly’). These are the most common forms of colour blindness.
• “All tests were performed without the glasses.” Hypothesis that the brain is being trained to compensate for the weak cones, like an audio equalizer [my analogy].
• They were testing a (patented) commercial product, in which one of the authors is invested. There may be specifics of the notch filters in the patent that were not in the paper. (I'm at work and not allowed to read active patents.)
- dhekir 6y ago> I'm at work and not allowed to read active patents. Is that related to legal issues (as in, if you don't read patents, there's less chance that you'll end up being prosecuted if you accidentally implement something similar)?
- mycall 6y agoThis is what "clean room" duplication efforts try to bypass.
- kps 6y agoI believe damages can be higher if you _knowingly_ infringe on a patent vs _unknowingly_ infringe on a patent, but I don't even play a lawyer on TV.
- Thorrez 6y agoYes, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treble_damages https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treble_damages