I want a face recognition system which can recognise familiar faces and also give me the central co-ordinates of the face. Will anyone help me in this search?
Posted by fahadshihab 4 years ago
Hello All, I have recently started an ambitious project. There will certainly be much learning along the way. But it is too ambitious? The goal is to build a bot that can be controlled remotely, to aid in the detection, marking, and ultimate removal of unexploded ordinance in Cambodia (in this first application). Though I have never built a robot of any type, I am quickly learning the basics, but would like ultimate beginner advice if anyone had any. If anyone would like details on the project, PM me. It's really a lot for a forum post... If there are any Veterans or military buffs out there, I could really use other first hand accounts of experiencing UEO. Through generous donation and aquisition, I have come cross an electric wheelchair, and many parts needed for a former "Battle-Bot". Battle-bot turns peace-maker. I love it! The motors are Bosche, 24V and ~750watts. Included were DC motor (high amp) speed controls, and 2x 12v 26A sealed lead-acid batteries. Very very excited to really dig in. I lack a quality track or model of a good track to use for traction, etc. Anyone know of any good and sturdy RC tank tracks I could look at for design or actual construction? Though I began to construct my own track out of sheet metal and various materials available (it actually turned out kinda ok), I don't intend on reinventing the wheel, as it were. 3" took me almost 2 hours. Will also be incorporating a ~3'-4' rotating and articulating arm. Trying to keep its weight to under ~30lbs. The wheelchair frame is very strong and moddable, Ws thinking of using a lazy susan type bearing, but I'm not sure I could find one rated for that weight for an affordable price. Any suggestions? Thanks for checking this out. Again, if you want more details, I'm happy to share my plans. Just PM me. This is being designed 100% open-source, and 100% documented with a video and written journal in order to be easily duplicated. Constructive criticism is NOT personal criticism! Huck
Posted by huck alexander 6 years ago
Conoy Township in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania; is voting to avoid flying surveillance remote controlled aircrafts above their skies. In a time when the United States government approves the use of drones to spy on the civilian population, I have found interesting how people are responding. This municipal ordinance definitely will not stop the use of drones on this area if deemed necessary for our national security but I wonder if this could be the start of a trend.
Posted by blkhawk 5 years ago
Hey. Recent (as far as I started looking) contest entries are really awesome. Like the electronic orbit wheel, the 3D DLP printer, Carbonize your friends, Predator costume, etc etc etc. The makers enter the cool contest here,of course. But if you have a look at the winners, it is very often the machine engineers and the professionals/those that do it for a living. Some of the instructables even fit better on kickstarter imho because you simply cannot replicate it at home. (or did I got the gist of Instructables.com wrong ?) Like the orbitng wheel or the 3D "diy" DLP printer. There is hardly a chance for an ordinary guy without specialized college eduction and/or access to hardware like waterjets, 3d printers and what have you. What do you guys think ? Fair ? Deal with it ? Obsolete participating in contests ? So shoot !
Posted by ianmcmill 5 years ago
I have started design and concept design on a robot to mark (via GPS and UV paint) and destroy unexploded ordinance in Cambodia. I am assembling teams for various aspects of the project (mechanical, electronics/power, practical application, coding and programming, construction, etc). While many people have offered their experience and knowledge, the more people contributing can only benefit the end product. This is not a money-maker, it's a life sustainer. I'm looking for people who are interested in using their skills to better someone else's existence. Though it is brand new, you can visit the project's blog at http://antiminebot.wordpress.com/ All advice is welcomed. Project updates will be regular. Thank you for your time, Huck
Posted by huck alexander 6 years ago
UK Broadcasting watchdog OfCom has ruled that the Channel 4 documentary The Great Global Warming Swindle broke broadcasting rules by implying that GW was not due to human activity.The film's key contentions were that the increase in atmospheric temperatures observed since the 1970s was not primarily caused by emissions of greenhouse gases from burning fossil fuels, and that the modern focus on climate change is based in politics rather than science. It is seen in some "climate sceptic" circles as a counter to Al Gore's movie An Inconvenient Truth, and credited with influencing public perception of climate science. It has reportedly been sold to 21 countries and distributed on DVD. GW experts featured in the documentary complained that they were quoted out of context, had not been told of the aims of the programme makers, and some quotes attributed to experts were, allegedly, made up by the reporters."It's very disappointing that Ofcom hasn't come up with a stronger statement about being misled," said Sir John Houghton, a former head of the UK Met Office and chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) scientific assessment. "I know hundreds of people, literally hundreds, who were misled by it - they saw it, it was a well-produced programme and they imagined it had some truth behind it, so they were misled and it seems Ofcom didn't care about that," he told BBC News."The programme has been let off the hook on a highly questionable technicality," said Bob Ward, former head of media at the Royal Society, who played a prominent role in co-ordinating objections to the film. "The ruling noted that Channel 4 had admitted errors in the graphs and data used in the programme, yet decided that this did not cause harm or offence to the audience." Plaintiffs accused the programme of containing myriad factual inaccuracies, but Ofcom says it was "impractical and inappropriate for it to examine in detail all of the multifarious alleged examples... set out in the complaints." On another issue - whether contributors to the programme had been treated fairly - Ofcom mainly found against Channel 4 and the film's producer WagTV. Former UK chief scientific adviser Sir David King had been misquoted and had not been given a chance to put his case, the regulator said. Ofcom also found in favour of Carl Wunsch, an oceanographer interviewed for the programme, who said he had been invited to take part in a programme that would "discuss in a balanced way the complicated elements of understanding of climate change", but which turned out to be "an out-and-out propaganda piece, in which there is not even a gesture toward balance". The film alleged that the IPCC's scientific reports were driven by politics rather than science, and Ofcom ruled the organisation had not been given adequate time to respond. Full BBC article, plus links
Posted by Kiteman 10 years ago