Slashdot Mirror


Building Cheap 100 Inch TVs

Nastar writes "If you visit eBay and such places there are guys selling 'kits' so that you can easily build your own 100 inch projection screen. There are websites such as 100InchTV selling the instructions for around $10 a pop. They say "this is the only product of this kind on the web" and "it is now possible to convert any type of television or computer monitor into a 100 inch video system that's truly amazing!". I don't like the idea of these people selling this information, especially when you can get it free from the good people at BSTV BSTV. Ihaven't built mine yet, but the reports of quality differ from so-so to fantastic! I suppose it depends on perfecting the technique involved. "

364 comments

  1. Building cheap 100 inch penisbirds... by Trolligula · · Score: -1, Troll

    COL. SANDURZ: He's an Asshole, sir.

    DARK HELMET: I know that. What's his name?

    COL. SANDURZ: That is his name, sir. Asshole. CmdrTaco Asshole.

    DARK HELMET: And his cousin?

    COL. SANDURZ: He's an Asshole too, sir. Gunners mate first class JonKatz Asshole.

    DARK HELMET: How many assholes we got on this ship anyhow?

    ALL CREW: Yo!!

    DARK HELMET: I knew it. I'm surrounded by Assholes!


    DARK HELMET: Wait 2 minutes before posting? FUCK! Even on slashdot, nothing works

    --

    In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women!-H.Simpson
    1. Re:Building cheap 100 inch penisbirds... by TrollMan+5000 · · Score: -1

      Outstanding. Simply outstanding!

      AC's beware. The Force is strong in this one!

    2. Re:Building cheap 100 inch penisbirds... by Trolligula · · Score: -1

      by the way, that is what we call a hat trick- three fps in a row, bitches!

      i dedicate this fp to the memory of Dead Fart Warrior. May you rejoin us soon.

      mad propz to sunken kursk, cyborg monkey, strom thurmond, fecal troll matter, and to any one else who i forgot to mention...eat it!

      --

      In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women!-H.Simpson
    3. Re:Building cheap 100 inch penisbirds... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

      Annonymous Coward -- "I post more shit to slashdot than all logged in posters combined "

      Eat it you elitist logged-in bastards.

    4. Re:Building cheap 100 inch penisbirds... by mackga · · Score: -1

      bravo! a truly masterful work of trolling, as well as a nice piece of truthful writing. does cmdr taco have a distented asshole? you BET!

      --

      "shop smart:shop s-mart" ash

  2. ARGH! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    third post maybe.

    :(

    W()()T!

  3. dogs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    dogs go poop too!

    Praise the lawd!

  4. cherish by (c)+Penis · · Score: -1

    cherish my beans!

    --
    The real thing. Accept no substitute!

  5. WOW! by clinko · · Score: 5, Funny

    This is great!

    I can get a diploma, make $20,000 in just 2 weeks, and now I can have a 100 inch tv for little cost at all!

    I'm gonna start reading my hotmail bulk-mail folder more often!

    1. Re:WOW! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Don't do that!!! I did it and now I constantly keep receiving emails from the Hotmail staff telling "Your penis size is too large".

    2. Re:WOW! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Diploma yeah right, as if you could get out of high school. Try heading off to your job at mcdonalds now that sick disgusting place.

    3. Re:WOW! by krog · · Score: -1, Flamebait

      nig-tard

    4. Re:WOW! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Better try you Hotmail Inbox instead. My Hotmail Junkmail folder is always empty, since the built in spam filter considers all my spam to be legit inbox-worthy email, no matter what setting it's at. My custom filters work most of the time though.

    5. Re:WOW! by Bob+McCown · · Score: 2, Funny
      So, if I apply this technique instead of all these "Increase your penis size" emails I get...

      Hmm...

    6. Re:WOW! by Brontosaurus+Jim · · Score: 4, Funny

      Ha! You got gyped dude. I got two college diplomas, $1,000,000 in a month, nude pix of britney spears absolutely free, a X10 wireless camera, a fake id, and passwords to all the best XXX sites!

      Looks like you have more work to do ;)

    7. Re:WOW! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      fuckin hillarious! Mod this up funny +1!

    8. Re:WOW! by yesthatguy · · Score: 1

      I don't know what's happening in your case, but I've seen a lot of my friends' boxes after applying the built-in filter, and it takes care of at least 90% of the junk.

      --
      Yes! That guy!
  6. what does this mean? by Spagornasm · · Score: 2, Interesting

    So, once people can buy tiny TV's and make them project perfectly well onto large screens, does this mean that the consumer electronics industry will have to readjust itself? Or does anyone think that there will be lawsuits from industry groups and lobbyists to try to block this kind of thing?

    --

    When nuance becomes the only objective we lose the ability to function
    1. Re:what does this mean? by Salgak1 · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Yes, but the "Big Woody" projector unit isn't the chrome-shiny-genuine-woodtoned-plastic that all the sheeple out there seem to think is required for entertaiment electronics. . .



      Imagine the consumer response. . .


      But it's. . .PLYWOOD. . . .and where do we take it for service ???

    2. Re:what does this mean? by silicon_synapse · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I would imagine that the resulting quality would depend partly on the quality of parts you use. A 3.5" portable tv certainly won't project a 100" image of the quality a 32" tv would. You still get what you pay for. But I wouldn't be too concerned with the average joe tearing apart tvs (or putting them back together) just yet. Speaking of which, don't tvs contain very large capacitors that hold deadly amounts of power for a long time? Whatch those fingers.

    3. Re:what does this mean? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yeah, you don't want to mess with the flyback if you don't have the right equipment. And "right equipment" does not mean a pair of rubber gloves dipped in the rubber stuff you put on tool handles, and a railroad spike. Trust me, I know.

      So much for trying to be McGuyver *shrug*

    4. Re:what does this mean? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes they do and store enough voltage to KILL YOU DEAD.

      Just Don't touch the red wire connected to the tube and to the capacitor

    5. Re:what does this mean? by Mandelbrot-5 · · Score: 1

      People tearing apart tv's and such is a great Idea... If the person is stupid, they will be a great Darwin award canadate.

      --
      Math is like sex. People who get it are popular in class, people who don't are not.
    6. Re:what does this mean? by ACorvus · · Score: 2, Funny

      Pah!

      The output of the average flyback is in the 10-25kV range. The capacitance of the tube (the metallised coatings and the glass of the tube form a poor and lossy cap) is in the order of a couple of nanofarads, so you're talking a few hundred millijoules of energy at best (worst?).

      I've had a shock at around 2-3 Joules from a 0.06uF cap bank charged to about 7kV, which is a couple of Joules or so (can't be bothered to calculate it), across the chest. It hurt like hell and made me throw the bank across the room, and I was very jittery afterwards, but it's not enough to cause fibrillation. You need double figures for that.

      Nevertheless, screwing around with HV can bite you hard, and once you start playing with the big stuff you want to keep one hand behind the back! And the output of my 2kW Tesla coil, I'd never consider a "safe hit" ;-)

      --
      -- Sig Sig Sputnik
    7. Re:what does this mean? by trcooper · · Score: 2

      Yes they do and store enough voltage to KILL YOU DEAD.


      I always thought that it wasn't the voltage that would kill you, it was the amperage... Isn't voltage just the amount of 'push', where amperage is the amount of 'fry'?

      IIRC, static electricity is very high voltage, but near nil amperage, so no harm.

    8. Re:what does this mean? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      HA-ha! I saw a dumbass do that back in High School Electronics class. The teflon insulated lead he was using *VAPORIZIED*, just turned to ash and smoke!

      Another time the same guy shorted out a resistor in a clock radio and detonated an electrolytic cap. Bits of metal were embedded in the ceiling!

      That class was a hoot!

      Cpt_Kirks

    9. Re:what does this mean? by homebru · · Score: 1
      Several ice ages ago, when large glass containers of vacuum ruled the electronics world, I was told that there were two schools of thought on the true cause of death in electronic misadventure:

      A) That, since the heart beats according to a small electrical shock to the muscles, a high enough voltage could kill you by shocking the heart out of or against its' normal rhythm.

      2) That a sufficient current applied across the heart could over-power the normal muscular contractions of the heart and simply stop it.

      IANAD (I am not a doctor). And I don't know which of these two explanations might be true. Personally, I am willing to believe both of them. YMMV. I have survived over forty years of professional and ham radio electronics by respecting the hell out of the ability of small inanimate objects to knock me off my feet and minimising their chances to do so.

    10. Re:what does this mean? by Myxorg · · Score: 1

      There's an old saying "The volts will jolt, but it's the mils that kill" or something like that. I always though that this is just a myth. I mean voltage is related to current (V=I*R). I.E high voltage == high current.

      Much more important than the amount of current or voltage, is the path of the current throught your body. If the current travels through your heart, then it doesn't take much to kill you. But if the path doesn't go through your heart you're pretty safe, aside from getting burned.

      I've heard tales of electricians who would test live wires by placing the middle finger on one lead and the index finger on the other. This would work in theory because the current travels up one finger and down the other, without passing through the heart. I sure as hell wouldn't do it though.

    11. Re:what does this mean? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you had bothered to go to the web page, then you would know that you don't have to take the TV apart. You just build the box around the screen and turn the tv upside down.

    12. Re:what does this mean? by matrix29 · · Score: 1

      It also looks like from the FAQ that they use a hard Fresnel lens (available at any 1-hour eyeglass shop) for the projection.

      --
      "Face it, a nation that maintains a 72% approval rating on George W. Bush is a nation with a very loose grip on reality.
    13. Re:what does this mean? by MentalPunisher2001 · · Score: 1

      15" monitor.
      800x600 progressive scan resolution @ 75Hz.
      DVD drive.
      WinDVD 2000.
      Extra PCI card (or normal AGP card w/VGA switch for Big screen gaming.
      ATI line-doubling TV tuner.
      Home surround sound system.
      Aureal SQ2500 w/optical SPDIF output.
      Cool shiny pull-down projection screen.
      Dark room.
      Long VGA cable.
      Wooden box.
      Fresnel lens.
      Patience.
      Joy.

    14. Re:what does this mean? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      right.. but voltage is the lesser of the 2 evils..right..? since if something had a very low voltage but a high amperage then it would still kill ya' cuz' it would have still have enough energy.. but of course the higher the voltage regardless of amperage contributes to a higher total energy.

    15. Re:what does this mean? by kbeast · · Score: 1

      I'm assuming your star trek techno-jargon is stating that it has a very powerful electric current. :)

      br>.kb

      --
      Two Wrongs Don't Make A Right-- But They Make Me Feel A Whole Lot Better
  7. Gee. . . by jiheison · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    A crappy looking site AND a pop-up. Thanks, for the heads up.

    1. Re:Gee. . . by Unknown+Bovine+Group · · Score: 1

      I was protected from viewing due to the Slashdot effect. Thanks, Slashdot!

      --
      m00.
    2. Re:Gee. . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

      Sorry you were inconvenienced by that. From now on, maybe Taco will put "Beware: Pop up add, you may need to move your wrist 1 inch to press the close button."

      Get some fucking exercise!

  8. room and wall space by shibut · · Score: 1

    How big of a room do you need for these monster screens? It seems to me that you would first have to have a huge room for this. Friends of mine have a 65" TV in a rather large living room and still it's pretty close. In this case you would also need some distance for the projector, right?

    PS I couldn't get the bstv I guess they were /.-ed faster than the blink of an eye.

    1. Re:room and wall space by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      How big of a room do you need for these monster screens?

      One with a wall that measure 100 inches diagonally. This is just an educated guess mind you.

    2. Re:room and wall space by gimpboy · · Score: 1

      some education. you dont even need 100 inches. you could fit it on a smaller wall if you made it concave :)

      --
      -- john
    3. Re:room and wall space by GiMP · · Score: 1

      Read projection tvs need a large viewing area due to the way it projects onto a surface INTO your eyes. A front projection like this doesn't have that problem... yeah it needs to be far from the wall, but not so far that it shouldn't work well even in a small apartment.

    4. Re:room and wall space by Bobo+the+Space+Chimp · · Score: 1

      I've a 2-story great room. 100" is kind of small. This tech is moving forward so slowly.

      When's that damned HDTV-quality, cheap TI massively-tiny mirror thing going to move out of the rediculous business presentation camp and into the home consumer non-wealthy market?

      --
      I am for the complete Trantorization of Earth.
    5. Re:room and wall space by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, id say 100x100x100 ought to do the trick, anlong with 4 other projectors ;)

      Yea, it was corny, but hey..

  9. Making Cheap Crack for Mods by The+Turd+Report · · Score: -1

    We need to find a way to make cheap crack for our moderators. With VALinux's stock in the shitter, slashdot can no longer keep up with their moderators demand for cheap crack. Taco has been cutting the crack with shredded copies of Jon Katz's unsold books, but the moderators have been catching on. What can we use for a cocaine substitute? Any ideas?

  10. pyramid by mydigitalself · · Score: 0, Troll

    i wonder if CmdrTaco is "high-up" on a "worthwhile" pyramid scheme...

  11. Ummmm by j0nkatz · · Score: -1

    It's just a big magnifying glass!
    A total rip off. Don't feed the trolls, cept for me of course.

    --
    Don't mod me, bro'!!!!
    1. Re:Ummmm by Spooging+Cum-Wanker · · Score: -1
      speaking of feeding...

      ...think I'll get some lunch.

      yummy McDonalds...

      fucking fast food.

      --

      News for turds, shit that splatters!

    2. Re:Ummmm by The+Turd+Report · · Score: -1

      I am getting ready to get something to eat so I can make a nice turd to write about. Any suggestions?

    3. Re:Ummmm by Spooging+Cum-Wanker · · Score: -1
      eat lots of corn

      and some un-sweetened cofee

      and bran flakes

      --

      News for turds, shit that splatters!

  12. 100-inch TV's by yatest5 · · Score: 2, Troll

    Is this a misprint?

    The biggest TV I've ever had was 12-inches and he said he'd never seen one bigger. Great tits as well.

    --
    • Mod parent up! [a] by Anonymous Coward (Score:5) Thurs, June 31, @13:37
    1. Re:100-inch TV's by Traxton1 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Once I figured out what you meant, on a scale of 1 - 10, that was sooo disturbing.

    2. Re:100-inch TV's by yatest5 · · Score: 0, Troll

      yeah, thought it might take a while for some to get - and some fucker put it down as offtopic ;-)!!

      I knew it'd get 5 in the end...

      --
      • Mod parent up! [a] by Anonymous Coward (Score:5) Thurs, June 31, @13:37
    3. Re:100-inch TV's by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...but funny as hell!

    4. Re:100-inch TV's by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I still don't get it...dammit.

    5. Re:100-inch TV's by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Me neither...what's TV stand for?

    6. Re:100-inch TV's by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      TV=transvestite? I cant think of anything else that makes the joke fit. I heard this on a movie, I swear!!! ;-)

  13. Building 100 inch anal probes! by Spooging+Cum-Wanker · · Score: -1
    --

    News for turds, shit that splatters!

  14. Stewpid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I can't believe this is on Slashdot... so disappointing.

    This is as stupid as blowing up a 150x150 pixel image to 1600x1200 in photoshop and expecting a good result.

    You'll end up with a dark, low contrast, blurry mess, but go for it.

    1. Re:Stewpid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      s/photoshop/gimp/

    2. Re:Stewpid by Mr.+Eradicator · · Score: 2, Informative

      Exactly.

      Standard TV has 480 interlaced lines at best. There's a reason people don't make NTSC TVs larger than about 60".

      If you truly want to go for 100" of quality, get an HD projector with a nice silk screen.

      After a few weeks with my 65" HDTV I think I'd puke if I watched TV on a 100" STV.

      --

      That's Mr. Eradicator to you.

      trance-port
    3. Re:Stewpid by Zathrus · · Score: 5, Informative

      There's a reason that people who are actually INTO projection only use line doubled (or better) images. It takes a lot of the ugliness out of the NTSC standard. Most HDTV sets are sold with built in line doublers now, of varying degrees of competence.

      There's no way in hell you could put one on this kind of thing though. The electronics can't handle the increased scan rate that would be required.

      It's not an issue of resolution - you're going to get the same resolution no matter what - it's an issue of quality. The real projection manufacturers work to control things like bloom, distortion, convergence, etc. on this scale. The requirements for a 32" TV are far less. And the vast majority of consumer TVs do a piss poor job even at their designed size. You have colors that don't even vaguely approximate reality because sets with more red sell better on a showroom floor. The contrast and brightness (aka white balance) are way off the scale because of the same reason.

      And brightness on these suckers is gonna suck. CRT projectors have low brightness anyway, and they're designed to be projected up to large sizes. Digital projectors (LCD, DLP, DILA) have 2-5x the brightness of a CRT and are still made for darkened rooms.

      Will some people be happy with it? Sure. Same people that download 100MB VCD's of some 2 hour movie and think it looks and sounds great, or listens to lowest quality MP3's (or hell, FM radio) and thinks they've never heard anything better.

      The only thing that makes me hope that the average consumer can indeed choose VASTLY improved quality over price is the success of DVD.

    4. Re:Stewpid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I always get a kick out of folks who seem to think they're morally superior because of their "refined" taste in recreational electronics.

      It's like being into muscle cars, but less honest, because at least everybody knows that muscle cars are a repressed homosexuality/dick size thing.

    5. Re:Stewpid by spudnic · · Score: 2

      The only thing that makes me hope that the average consumer can indeed choose VASTLY improved quality over price is the success of DVD.

      I'm sorry, I know you want to have hope for the humans, but I think your assumption that quality is what makes most people choose DVD is incorrect.

      Most people that I've discussed this subject with (and this is quite a few) who have delved into DVD have done so for 3 main reasons: 1) Eliteness factor, 2) Nonsequential access methods to parts of the disk without all that messy waiting around for tape to wind, and 3) Bonus material not available on VHS.

      Most people either don't have good enough televisions, acute senses, or motivation to grasp the enhanced quality. They know it looks ok, but don't put a lot of thought into it.

      --
      load "linux",8,1
  15. Nastar gets even by fobbman · · Score: 5, Funny

    The guy who posted this story is probably someone who was selling the plans either on eBay or on the `net for $10 a pop and figured "If you can't beat them, /. them".

    Well, it worked.

    1. Re:Nastar gets even by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lol thats great. Its only a matter of time before the RIAA tricks them into slashdotting every mp3 service.

  16. The Catch? by robbyjo · · Score: 1, Informative

    Yeah, the instruction costs $10. It doesn't tell you the equipments you have to buy.

    For me, constructing 100 inch or even more display is "easy". Just buy a projector (that costs $4000) and then project it to a screen or wall. Simple. The farther the distance, the bigger is the resulting image. You can then adjust the focus. Voila. Fragging big time! :-)

    --

    --
    Error 500: Internal sig error
    1. Re:The Catch? by British · · Score: 2

      So will future slashdot articles feature items advertised in comic books, you know the, ones you can get if you sell 8000 copies of GRIT magazine? If so, I would like some expert Linux help on the cardboard submarine.

      I think X-entertainment had articles on such scams intended towards kids. I'm glad they've moved up to scams for adults.

    2. Re:The Catch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

      cool... do I owe you $10 now?

    3. Re:The Catch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yes

  17. Mmmmmm.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Life size porn. [homer drool]

  18. Sounds Doubtful (IMHO) by chris-johnson · · Score: 2, Interesting

    While the idea of turning a 17" monitor into a 100" one that would take up a good portion of my wall sounds intriguing, it sounds incredibly doubtful to me. Think about how ugly low resolution is.. especially on a large monitor. I haven't looked at the site yet, but I would imagine they simply magnify the image someway, if that's the case then you're just blowing it up.. nothing special. But doing that would uglify everything. 1/2" pixels don't sound particularly appealing to me.

    --

    <wik>/bin/finger that girl in the back row of machines.
    1. Re:Sounds Doubtful (IMHO) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1/2 inch pixels sure looked good when playing the atari 2600 on a projection tv in the old days

    2. Re:Sounds Doubtful (IMHO) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you look at any proector on the market which accepts a standard NTSC (TV) signal, they ALL do nothing more than magnify the screen. Whether you're watching a 5 inch B&W or a 52 inch projection, broadcast TV is still only 200 lines of resolution. The most you can hope for is 400 lines.

      Standard projectors works the exact same way as this kit but use much higher output CRT's or LCD's and bright bulbs which magnify the light through precision lenses.

    3. Re:Sounds Doubtful (IMHO) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I actually tried this a couple of years ago with a 15'' monitor, a cardboard box of the right size and a 10cm magnifyer glass. It did work, but the image was blurry and upside-down (and my monitor's colors went all funny when I turned it upside down). Maybe it will be better with a 17'' with brightness&contrast on 100%
      Something i would like to try is to put a monitor under the glass in an overhead projector, I really wonder how that will work.

  19. BSTV. by TrollMan+5000 · · Score: -1

    Aptly named, no?

  20. fSTFUKp! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    First STFU Katz post!



    "Watch those Discordians grovel once I've cornered the market on hotdog buns!"

  21. Yeah Baby! by Clint+Trollwood · · Score: -1, Troll

    Can't wait to see the Goatse.cx man at 100inches!

  22. Quality good for only... by ThatComputerGuy · · Score: 2, Informative

    I've heard that the quality is only good for either animated movies, or real movies. I can't remember which it was, but at the time I was researching this stuff, I saw mostly images of one type, which I think was animated.

    As you can see from the image at BSTV, actual footage comes out as you would expect, only so-so. It makes sense that this would only work well for animations, as those usually have large areas of solid colors, and would appear less pixelated when blown up as such.

    --
    XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
    1. Re:Quality good for only... by spectral · · Score: 1

      I should think animation would be worse.. animation tends to have harder, more sharply defined edges than real life, and no variation in the color around the edges would make this much more apparent.

      Just think along the lines of JPEG style compression (I realize it's not the same, but work with me here).. it's optimized for real life, where there's a certain amount of blend between everything, there's no real hard defined edges as there is in animation, text, etc. Thus when you have sharp edges, it tends to screw them up a bit. yea, it's a compression artifact, but it tends to show that real life doesn't really have that many sharp edges.

      I think i'd notice the pixelation on a sharp edge much more than on a slightly blurry/fuzzy/real one.

  23. Broken Link by TheFalken · · Score: 1

    The link given in the article goes to a domain's for sale page.

    1. Re:Broken Link by TheFalken · · Score: 1

      IE6/Win2K btw. Seems to be complaining about non-english pages, which is odd, as I'm in the UK.

    2. Re:Broken Link by czardonic · · Score: -1, Offtopic

      Maybe you aren't clicking right. Try using your main finger.

      --
      Takahashi Rumiko made beats! DON, taku, DON, taku. . .
  24. Monitor by Root+Down · · Score: 2

    Damn... and to think, all this time I thought my 21" monitor was the bomb. I didn't see that my RedHat config supported a 100x100 bazillion pixel resolution, but maybe in the 7.2 release.

    1. Re:Monitor by JabberWokky · · Score: 2
      I didn't see that my RedHat config supported a 100x100 bazillion pixel resolution

      No, but debian supports a 200x200 gajillion resolution.

      --
      Evan "Dances with SuSE" E.

      --
      "$30 for the One True Ring. $10 each additional ring!" -- JRR "Bob" Tolkien
  25. Hello. by TrollMan+5000 · · Score: -1

    You forgot me.

    Putz.

    1. Re:Hello. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Strike 4, your outta here mister.

    2. Re:Hello. by TrollMan+5000 · · Score: -1

      Who the blazing fuck asked you, anonymous c0cksucker?

      Faggot.

    3. Re:Hello. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Asked who what?

    4. Re:Hello. by Trolligula · · Score: -1

      Trollman 5000...

      my sincerest apologies for leaving you out. i was afraid to do shout outs, for fear of leaving some brother trolls out.

      now my fear is realized. again, i'm sorry.

      --

      In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women!-H.Simpson
    5. Re:Hello. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

      Say goodnight gracy.

    6. Re:Hello. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

      GRACY SUCKS MY BALLS!

      Fucking slashdot. So I make an account, my first fucking one, and post two messages. Sure they weren't fucking insightful, but no worse than the other crap that gets modded up.

      So they get modded down to -1, and BAM fucking 72 hour ban. Slashdot sucks ass!

      So what is there left to do? Join the ranks of the trolls... Troll for freedom!

    7. Re:Hello. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

      Welcome to AC trolling which is much better than being a named troll, stupid motherfuckers.

    8. Re:Hello. by TrollMan+5000 · · Score: -1

      That's OK. After the ban, you'll be freely posting at -1. Enjoy!

  26. 100InchTV by matt_wilts · · Score: 5, Funny

    Why on earth would I want a 3-foot tall transvestite?

    Matt

    1. Re:100InchTV by Unknown+Bovine+Group · · Score: -1, Troll

      That would have been funny, except 100 inches is over 8 feet.

      --
      m00.
    2. Re:100InchTV by matt_wilts · · Score: 4, Funny

      Doh! I've fallen into the NASA trap of mixing my metric & Imperial measurements!

    3. Re:100InchTV by Mhrmnhrm · · Score: -1, Offtopic

      Simple... The Rocky Horror Picture Show!

      --
      I suspect that one of these choices is incorrect. Correct.
    4. Re:100InchTV by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

      Why on earth would I want a 3-foot tall transvestite?

      That'd be an 8-foot tall transvestite.

    5. Re:100InchTV by sacherjj · · Score: 1, Informative

      Yet, 100 inches is not the height, but the diagonal measurement. (assuming a 4x3 ratio)
      (4x)^2 + (3x)^2 = 10000 in^2
      16x^2 + 9x^2 = 10000 in^2
      x^2 = 10000/25 in^2
      x^2 = 400 in^2
      x = 20 in
      3x = 60 in
      60 inches = 5 feet.
      So, technically up to five feet, not eight.
      (I feel like I am back in middle school... :)

    6. Re:100InchTV by hoggoth · · Score: 4, Funny

      > Why on earth would I want a 3-foot tall transvestite?
      > That would have been funny, except 100 inches is over 8 feet
      > 100 inches is not the height, but the diagonal measurement.

      So you would be measuring from the tip of his left high heel shoes to the rightmost part of his fashionable hat?

      --
      - For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat /dev/random (may take some time)
    7. Re:100InchTV by LMacG · · Score: 3, Troll

      > Why on earth would I want a 3-foot tall transvestite?

      Maybe (s)he could do your inch to foot conversions for you?
      --

      --
      Slightly disreputable, albeit gregarious
    8. Re:100InchTV by maggard · · Score: 1
      You measured transvestites in middle school? I didn't realize New Math was so progressive.

      Any other measurements you'd care to share?

      --
      I don't read ACs: If a post isn't worth so much as a nom de plume to its author then I wont bother either.
    9. Re:100InchTV by KFury · · Score: 4, Funny

      To all those people talking about measuring transvestites diagonally vs vertically, this is stupid.

      The method of measurement is tied to *what* you're measuring. When you measure a television, you measure diagonally. When you measure a person, typically the relevant measure is height.

      When you measure a transvestite, you measure length. 8 feet? Ouch.

    10. Re:100InchTV by rark · · Score: 2, Funny

      conversation piece

      esspecially if you build a beowulf cluster of them

      (sorry)

    11. Re:100InchTV by yesthatguy · · Score: 1

      Or her. We want to let it be whatever it wants to be called now...no discriminating.

      --
      Yes! That guy!
    12. Re:100InchTV by Unknown+Bovine+Group · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Somehow my pointing out that 100 inches=8 1/3 feet is flamebait, but your acknledging it is hilarious.

      Dear Moderators,
      I hate you all.
      Oh wait I'm a moderator too.

      --
      m00.
  27. Magnigfy by E1ven · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I remember reading about one of these a while ago.

    I can't get to the linked site right now (I'm presuming it was slashdotted allready), but the way it worked was to basically use a magnifing glass. The screen emmits through a box of a certain size (the screen size), If you put a lense over that, in theory, you could magnify that light, so that it would be large enough to fill a "100 inch" screen, but it would look horrible!
    I would think it would be very blurred, very hard to see (they don't give off THAT much light), and the colours would wash out.

    I'd be curious to hear of anyone's actual experiences in building one of these.

    Just MHO, of course.

    --
    Colin Davis
    1. Re:Magnigfy by BxT · · Score: 1

      they don't give off THAT much light ...

      This is a key point- the thing would be so dim even in a pitch black room that it wouldn't be funny.

      Here's a good link that explains it all.

      -BxT

    2. Re:Magnigfy by e4 · · Score: 1

      I built one basically straight from one of the BSTV plans. Cardboard, flat black spray paint, electrical tape and a frensel lens (a.k.a. "sheet magnifier" for $6 at Staples or Office Depot), and a 13" TV. I didn't expect much, but I thought it would be fun to try.

      It works better than you might expect, if you can get your focal length right. It takes some tinkering, and it needs to be a bit dark in the room you're projecting in. It's not going to look like your local movie house, but it's really not too bad.

      I tried it with a larger TV, but based on my 8x10 lens, the 13" TV worked best. It was also easier to turn upside down. (Oh, and for what it's worth, two frensel lenses won't re-reverse the image.)

      But for a couple hours of my time and one trip to the office supply store, it was worth it.

  28. ****ADVICE GRAVELY NEEDED! PLEASE HELP!**** by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll
    Sorry to have to post this Anonymously instead of using my regular account, but as you will see my problem is pretty embarrassing. I first met "Jenny" when I was out windsurfing one Saturday. No, she wasn't lying on the beach "catching rays", she was out on the waves like me! Jenny is as much of a windsurfing fanantic as I am, and she likes nothing better than to spend a whole day out flyin' over the water. I talked to her that afternoon, and asked her out. After a few dates, I began seriously falling for her. She has blonde hair, green eyes, a cute sprinkle of freckles across the bridge of her nose, and a great bod! Jenny is smart, funny, genuinely kindhearted (she even likes my cooking! :-p), and a great windsurfer. When I'm with her, I feel smarter, funnier, and I want to be kind to everybody. And I know this sounds corny, but we do have real conversations about things that matter to us - I can't tell you how precious that is in a relationship. I'm really insanely happy, except for one problem.


    The problem is she has this bulging, distended anus. I don't know if all her ex-boyfriends used to do anal sex with her, or if it was just one guy with a really big dick, or if she was into "fisting", or what (I haven't yet gotten up the nerve to ask). I barely even noticed any of my ex-girfreinds' assholes (God, that sounds so weird), but with Jenny, it's like a bulging knob a couple of inches across. I mean, it's not as if she has incontinence problems or anything, but it's really disconcerting to see this gaping, caulifowered bunghole staring out at me whenever we're showering together and she bends over to pick up the shampoo (and forget about making love "doggy style" :-/). Sorry to put you all on the spot like this, but I really don't know what to do. I've been obsessing so much over Jenny's anus that I'm starting to become distracted at work. If this one thing is so much of a problem for me, should I just break up with her? Or should I try to come to terms with the anus? Please help! Any and all advice will be greatly appreciated. Thanks! -G.F.

  29. Don't bother visiting 100inchtv.com by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    At least for me, the site popped up a window I couldn't get rid of when I tried to leave, and Netscape crashed.

    Down with sites that abuse javascript.

  30. Scam? by Schnapple · · Score: 5, Informative
    Isn't this the same thing they've been "selling" for decades now? It consists of a large sheet, your television and a Fresnel lens (where the $10 comes in, BTW). You basically throw a sheet in front of your TV and place the Fresnel lens between them and viola. Of course, this is a flimsy arrangement, so blueprints to construct a wooden monstrosity to hold the whole thing are included. Oh, and of course this will produce an upside down picture (since we have basic telescope theory at work here) so you have to turn your TV upside down (which may have been less of a big deal back in the 1950's when TV's were basically boxes and they came up with this idea).

    Oh, and nevermind the fact that with today's technology and a greater emphasis than ever on DVD and digital picture we're willing to throw away $10 at whatever snake oil peddler comes along. "Just project it on your bed sheets!"

    For shame this made it as a Slashdot topic.

    Schnapple
    http://members.tripod.com/schnapple99/

    1. Re:Scam? by rhost89 · · Score: 1

      And just to point this out, wouldnt all text be backwords unless you provided some sort of mirror system?? I remember in the old projection systes that used lenses had huge mirrors inside just to reverse the image.

      --
      I will bend your mind with my spoon
    2. Re:Scam? by Schnapple · · Score: 1

      No, I think it's literally just upside down.

      Schnapple
      http://members.tripod.com/schnapple99/

    3. Re:Scam? by EisPick · · Score: 2

      you have to turn your TV upside down

      I haven't ever turned a TV upside down, but I have turned computer monitors upside down. Try it yourself and you'll see that the colors distort (and that the distortion can be corrected with the degauss button, if available).

      I've always been curious about the cause of this (hint, hint, Slashdot readers); I assume it's related to the effect of the earth's magnatic field on the stream of electrons painting the scren.

      Since I've never seen a TV with a degauss button, and since I presume a TV would suffer discoloration just like a monitor, this would seem to be another reason not to bother with this kludgy setup.

    4. Re:Scam? by doob · · Score: 1

      Since I've never seen a TV with a degauss button, and since I presume a TV would suffer discoloration just like a monitor, this would seem to be another reason not to bother with this kludgy setup.

      No, but most TVs that I've seen seem to have an On/Off button, which produces the same effect (at least it does on a monitor).

      --
      In the spoon, there is no Soviet Russia!
    5. Re:Scam? by pukeAndCry · · Score: 1

      Most televisions deGauss when you turn them on.

    6. Re:Scam? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is no left-right inversion. You're thinking of projecting an image with a lens, which flips both up/down and left/right. The TV contraption will also flip up/down and left/right. You take care of the up/down flip by putting the TV upside down. You take care of the left/right flip by looking at the projected image from behind, instead of from front. Think of it like a movie projector and a screen - normally the audience sits between the projector and screen, but in this contraption the screen sits in between the audience and projector.

    7. Re:Scam? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting
      For shame this made it as a Slashdot topic.
      No, it's a very important topic
      Display technologies have not improved in 20 years...whereas memory, cpu, disk space, network speed, etc have all improved vastly.
      Aren't you tired of having only enough screen space to do just one thing? What if you want to be watching a football game, reading slashdot, coding, and playing counter-strike all at the same time? You've got the CPU's, you've got the memory, you've got the bandwidth, you've got the souped up vid card, but where the hell will you put it all? Surely not on your hokey 17".
      I've been waiting YEARS for a solution to this problem, and noone is doing jack. (as far as I can tell). Sure, you can get a hi-res projector system for $15,000...but that's completely prohibitive. We need a viable low-cost solution...
      The reason noone uses 1200X1600 resolution is because the fonts are just too small to read ... but if the screen was projected...say 3X, you would have readable fonts...and a whole lot of screen-space to put applications on. The trick is ensuring that the projection doesn't degrade the image quality. But I'm sure it wouldn't take $15,000 to solve that problem.
    8. Re:Scam? by Nerftoe · · Score: 1

      Since I've never seen a TV with a degauss button...

      Actually, I think some of the larger Mitsubishi TVs have them. I have a 35" that has the degauss button on the front.

    9. Re:Scam? by Schnapple · · Score: 2, Interesting
      We need a viable low-cost solution
      Exactly - it's low cost but it's not viable. Projection onto a cloth screen isn't a solution. Break out your old 10MM home movies and project them onto a screen, and I think you'll get the idea of the effect here.

      Having said that, were anyone to do this and be 100% satisfied with it (or hell, 80%) then I'd love to hear about it.

      Schnapple

    10. Re:Scam? by MrDelSarto · · Score: 1

      True I'd say. Companies like SGI sell monitors in two formats - northern hemisphere and southern hemisphere, since the earths magnetic field is directed differently depending which hemishpere you are in.

    11. Re:Scam? by dasunt · · Score: 2


      Different monitors act in different ways, as I learned from turning monitors sideways for playing games with MAME. Some have little distortion, some have a ton of it.


      I'm not sure about weather or not magnification/low resolution would be a problem. I've noticed that sending a real player file that's encoded at around 2 megs/minute to my older 25" set noticeably reduces the artifacts that are viewable, and smoothes out the image (at least with anime, maybe I should try a "real" movie someday), but divx/avi still have noticeable artifacts occasionally, due to (I'm assuming) real media compressing large areas of the same color better. The lower resolution of the TV also helps some games, especially emulated consoles, the game looks more "real", while on the computer screen, the high resolution actually hurts some emulated console games. Now if the lens is exact, then there will be pixilization problems, however, if there is a certain amount of imperfection (blurryness), I'm guessing a lot of games would be playable, and vids would be okay.


      Just my $.02

    12. Re:Scam? by G-funk · · Score: 2

      This is because you've rotated your monitor more than 90 in the earth's magnetic field, and it throws off the magnets. Hence you have to hit the degausss button tho get everything aligned again (or whatever it does, but I love that button).

      --
      Send lawyers, guns, and money!
    13. Re:Scam? by antic · · Score: 1

      Since I've never seen a TV with a degauss button...

      My television automatically deguasses if left off for 30 minutes. Had to do it recently after the bottom-left corner developed an inverted-colour problem. It can correct any colour issues usually caused by nearby speakers, vacuuming the living room, etc.

      --
      'Thats they exact same thing a banana wrench monkey.'
    14. Re:Scam? by wroot · · Score: 1
      Isn't this the same thing they've been "selling" for decades now? It consists of a large sheet, your television and a Fresnel lens (where the $10 comes in, BTW). You basically throw a sheet in front of your TV and place the Fresnel lens between them and viola. Of course, this is a flimsy arrangement, so blueprints to construct a wooden monstrosity to hold the whole thing are included. Oh, and of course this will produce an upside down picture (since we have basic telescope theory at work here) so you have to turn your TV upside down (which may have been less of a big deal back in the 1950's when TV's were basically boxes and they came up with this idea)

      Let me note that turning your TV upside-down won't help, since the picture projected on the wall will not be rotated by 180 degrees, but inverted horizontally, so after you turn your TV upside-down, you'll probably still recognize the actors, but you'll have to adapt to reading right-to-left.

      Additionally, which I see as the biggest problem, the brightness will be miserable. Simply blowing up a picture N times reduces the brightness N^2 times. Add here the fact that the lens will only collect a small fraction of the light from the screen and you'll have a 1000 to 100000-fold loss of brightness.

      Wroot

    15. Re:Scam? by Lars+T. · · Score: 1
      Let me note that turning your TV upside-down won't help, since the picture projected on the wall will not be rotated by 180 degrees, but inverted horizontally, so after you turn your TV upside-down, you'll probably still recognize the actors, but you'll have to adapt to reading right-to-left.
      Err, nope.
      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

  31. Legality by E1ven · · Score: 5, Funny

    Anyone wonder if this might be an illegial modification of your Television, depriving the TV producers of the money you would have paid for larger sets?

    Colin

    --
    Colin Davis
    1. Re:Legality by E1ven · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      The above was intended as a Joke.
      I had included a &lt Smirk &gt but Slashdot cut that out, thinking I meant HTML.

      IF I had meant HTML I wouldn't have selected PLAIN OLD TEXT.
      Grrr.

      --
      Colin Davis
    2. Re:Legality by unformed · · Score: 5, Funny

      Exactly...by adding a magnifying glass or projector to the screen, you are depriving the copyright owners by reproducing the image on an unlicensed object, such as a wall...

      You will be undoubtedly sued under the DMCA...blah blah blah yipetty yay

    3. Re:Legality by Unknown+Bovine+Group · · Score: 1
      Anyone wonder if this might be an illegial modification of your Television, depriving the TV producers of the money you would have paid for larger sets?

      No more than mixing your chocolate and peanut butter deprives Hershey of money. Hmm, Maybe that's illegal too.

      --
      m00.
    4. Re:Legality by Guido69 · · Score: 1

      Not to mention that if you display without un-reversing the image, you have just modified a copyrighted work.

      Careful, or eBay might set up a housecalls department for VeRO.

      -Windows dirty? Clean your box with Linux.

      --
      - If we aren't supposed to eat animals, then why are they made out of meat? - Steven Wright
    5. Re:Legality by Chakat · · Score: 5, Funny
      No more than mixing your chocolate and peanut butter deprives Hershey of money. Hmm, Maybe that's illegal too.

      Of course it is. It violates the Don't Mix Chocolate Act (DMCA). Circumventing Hershey's valuable intellectual property by creating your own confectionary devices deprives them of precious money. Hershey engineers spent many years creating their blends and you want to do it yourself?! What kind of commie pinko are you?

      --

      If god had intended you to be naked, you would have been born that way.

    6. Re:Legality by Luyseyal · · Score: 2

      That was damn funny, thanks for making my day!

      But seriously, I wonder if there is a legal defense here, or at least a convincing argument against treating intermediate formats as copies instead of simply a means to an end.

      IANAL, IANA physicist... that said...

      What the hell am I talking about?

      Basically, you are creating an intermediate "copy" of the television program or movie via the Freznel lens. It's a copy because of the properties defining how light travels through the lens.*

      If you could demonstrate this to the Courts, your Congresscritters, etc., then perhaps you could convince them that an intermediate format of a copyrighted work stored in RAM does not count as a copy of a work and therefore is not subject to copyright restrictions or regulation. Not that you couldn't be sued for using the intermediate format to make thousands of copies of the work and selling them for $5 a pop... it would just a priori prevent Congress from regulating it directly.
      * I am not a physicist, but IIRC from high school physics, copies of the original photons are generated from the lens.
      Cheers,
      -l

      --
      Help cure AIDS, cancer, and more. Donate your unused computer time to worldcommunitygrid.org. Join Team Slashdot!
    7. Re:Legality by DrCode · · Score: 2
      Besides, didn't you read the license on your candy bar (the fine print below the nutrition information)? You automatically agreed to its terms when you unpeeled it.


      You don't really own the candy, but have only purchased a license to ingest it; and you are prohibited from intermingling it with other products.

    8. Re:Legality by pruss · · Score: 1

      Actually, quite a number of copies get created.

      1. In electrons in the CRT.
      2. In the excited phosphorescent atoms on the inner surface of the CRT.
      3. In the atoms of the glass of the CRT excited by the passage of photons through it.
      4. In the photons mentioned above.
      5. In the excited atoms in the lens and in the photons coming out of the lens if they are different. (Don't know.)
      6. In the complicated light-sensitive chemicals of the eye.
      7. In the optical nerve.
      8. In the brain.

      Alex

    9. Re:Legality by Technician · · Score: 2

      What intellectial property? They gave it away on TV so it's common knowledge now. Remember the commercials? "You got chocolate in my peanut butter?" "You got peanut butter on my cohocolate"? No DMCA reverse engineering here!

      --
      The truth shall set you free!
  32. Old plans... by Rob+Parkhill · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I have an oollllddd (1980??) copy of Popular Electronics kicking around somewhere that shows you how to do this too. Maybe when big screen TVs were hard to come by and insanely expensive, this was a good idea...

    --
    "Tomorrow's forecast: a few sprinkles of genius with a chance of doom!" - Stewie Griffin
    1. Re:Old plans... by terpia · · Score: 1

      Ok so big screen TVs arent terribly hard to find anymore. They arent as expensive either. But ive got a 27" TV that hasnt been used for two years and this sounds like fun to try. I'll happily pay a few bucks for a fresnel lens and a semi-reasonable excuse to take apart my unused TV. Even if the picture isnt that great, it could be used to run winamp/xmms visual plugins at a party. The bottom line is that I think this still is a good idea for tinkerers and the financially challenged.

      --
      .sig wanted: Must be concise, funny, and display my cleverness.
  33. Alternative link to Google Cache of similar page by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:1pInHo8PDFk:w ww.webone.com.au/~caoz/bsinstructions.htm+%22free+ 100+inch+TV+projector%22&hl=en

  34. I have one but never tried it.. by libre+lover · · Score: 2, Funny

    Many years ago I participated in a "buy something/subscribe to something (I dont' remember what it was but it was something I wanted at the time) and get a free big screen TV". What I got was a large fresnel lens in a plastic frame that you put in front of a regular TV to project its image on a wall, just like on the website. I never tried it out for its intended use but I did have a good time using it as a death ray^h^h^h solar concentrator to set leaves and stuff on fire.

    --
    Error: .sig undefined
    1. Re:I have one but never tried it.. by BkrStMuse · · Score: 1

      Hahaha! The death ray sounds like more fun than the 100" TV

  35. you know what 640x480 on a 21" monitor looks like? by carlcmc · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Now take that and multiply it times your worst possible dream to get pixels the size of green peas across the wall in your 100" display.

  36. p.s. by krog · · Score: -1, Troll

    happy motherfucking Troll Tuesday!!!@#%!@$^%

    (i'll see you in 72 hours or so...)

    Slow Down Choadboy!

    1. Re:p.s. by Sunken+Kursk · · Score: -1

      Do it Doug! Welcome to the ranks. Get to work, this post didn't get modded down too hard.

      --

      When I became a man, I put childish ways behind me.

  37. But does it work? by Patrick+McRotch · · Score: 2
    Turning a normal monitor or TV into a projector is nice idea, if it works. I'm fairly concerned about the quality. I strongly suspect the picture will end up grainy and will perhaps be distorted.


    Still, it would be cool for gaming. Can you imagine playing Quake III with this? And it would be more suited to gaming than an LCD projector, because the refresh rate is going to be whatever your monitor uses, rather than the dismal LCD refresh rate. All in all, a pretty cool idea.

  38. I have a slashdot mod theory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If a message that has been moded up recieves enough troll responses then it actually will get moded back down. I like to think of it as the "troll pull" effect.

  39. Karma Whore, where are you? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Google cache right here

    http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:1pInHo8PDFk:w ww.webone.com.au/~caoz/bsinstructions.htm+BSTV+100 +inch+plans&hl=en

  40. One every minute... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is that "turn your TV brighness ALL the way up and then some, and use this frenzel (?) lense" thing, no?

  41. For dumb people by commonchaos · · Score: 1

    Humm.... do I pay $3,600 for a 3x3 LCD wall.

    Or $10 for a kit to make a 100 inch TV....

  42. Big TV for real is going to get cheaper by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The big screen TV people are working hard on cost reductions and vast improvements in quality and maintainability -- I've seen some demos of stuff that's coming out soon and it's fantastic and can be made cheaply.

  43. more links by pruss · · Score: 2, Informative

    There are other sites with the instructions that haven't been slashdotted. See: http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg. tcl?msg_id=0038A5

    If that doesn't survive, get it from the google cache.

    ARP

  44. Re:****ADVICE GRAVELY NEEDED! PLEASE HELP!**** by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    For the love of God.. Preperation H. Preperation H

  45. Going blind! by isa-kuruption · · Score: 2

    Like my eye sight isn't bad enough already!

  46. I sell a similar product by billmaly · · Score: 3, Funny

    Maybe you've heard of Amway...No??? Well sit down, let's chat. HEY!!! Where you going???

    Darn....guess it's back to "Lose weight now, Ask me how!!"

    Anyone sending money to this guy is a foole.

    1. Re:I sell a similar product by Telecommando · · Score: 1

      FYI: Amway now calls themselves Quixtar.
      New name, same old pyramid scheme.

      --
      Beta sux! Join the Slashcott! http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=4760465&cid=46173047
    2. Re:I sell a similar product by GigsVT · · Score: 2

      Quixtar is the WWW storefront part of Amway, the way I understand it. I believe both companies still exist, both are part of the Amway family.

      --
      I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
  47. Did you ever wonder... by Dr.+Amazing+Discover · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    Did you ever wonder what is it that makes the anus of a youth so exciting? Well, according to my research, it's a combination of the inherent tightness of an untouched sphincter, plus the simple thrill of doing the taboo. According to NAMBLA member Roy Wallace of Sarasota, Florida, the thrill is best achieved when you penetrate the boy in front of a mirror, "so you can see the his face just light up as you tear into him." I'll just have to take your word for it, Roy! Kiddie sex is wrong! Until next time, folks!

  48. OT: Another Crappy Portal [protista.com] by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    Didn't you used to have the ICQ messages on Slashdot updates?

    Then made that?

    Hrmm, those ICQ msg's were good...

    1. Re:OT: Another Crappy Portal [protista.com] by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      GOOD CALL! Yeah, I did. But my linux box decided not to boot one day after I moved it from one house to another. As such, slashbot was dead. But... I've been writing one for AIM that uses the Protista functionality. Fun stuff, but hard to finish while taking midterms. (as such in 9 minutes)

    2. Re:OT: Another Crappy Portal [protista.com] by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

      oh yeah, I lost the code too. The icq version won't probably make a comeback for a while. And it was a work of art. Sad sad day...

  49. Fresnel lenses are new technology? by dave-fu · · Score: 1

    Color me surprised. Having made one in the past, uh. On the cheap, it's not horrible, but let's just say I won't be trading in my Vega anytime soon.

    --
    Easy does it!
    This comment has been submitted already, 276865 hours , 59 minutes ago. No need to try again.
  50. WOW! Moderator crack! by TrollMan+5000 · · Score: -1

    I love it when unfunny, off-topic posts get modded up like this.

    I hope the fucking mods burn in metamod hell!

  51. "welcome to the ranks"? by Yellow+Brick+Choad · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    i troll three other accounts... now i'm reduced to posting using Lynx from another IP. woe is me.

    it could be worse -- i could be a shit-gargling AC.

    1. Re:"welcome to the ranks"? by Sunken+Kursk · · Score: -1

      Hey, don't knock it. I was reduced to posting through bablefish last week! Now that's tenacity right there!

      --

      When I became a man, I put childish ways behind me.

  52. I think I know... by gorillasoft · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    what the BS in bstv stands for...

    1. Re:I think I know... by gorillasoft · · Score: 1

      I make a joke about something that is an obvious gimmick instead of a serious product and it is moderated as flamebait? Interesting.

  53. You only have begun by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    To scratch the surface. Javascript is fundamentally evil. It is the spwawn of Satan and it need to be consigned to hell where it belongs. Javascript is the beast unleashed upon the earth. The best way to repel the beast is of course to turn off Javascript. Just look at the incredible number of evil things you can do in the way of spying and remote hacking and destruction with Javascript. Check window size, check browser, open as many windows as you want till the browser crashes, run nimba launch scripts and other viral and trojan script kiddiez. As I said the perversion of Javascript is limitless because of its evil nature. Turn the shit off.

  54. Did this years ago by Scutter · · Score: 5, Interesting

    My dad had a setup years ago that was basically a wooden box with a lens. Inside the box, he put a 13" TV with the picture reversed and upside down (I have no idea ho he managed that). He projected it on the wall. It looked fantastic. The most expensive part was the lens.

    The only real downside was that you could really only see it well if the lights were turned down (or off).

    --

    "Tell me doctor, with all of your defenses, are there any provisions for an attack by killer bees?"
    1. Re:Did this years ago by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you reverse the yoke coils, the picture will be upside down and backwards.

    2. Re:Did this years ago by gorilla · · Score: 2
      It's actually very easy to reverse the picture, all you need to do is to swap the deflector yoke connections, so that when the TV diverts the beam to the top left of the picture, it diverts to the bottom right of the tube.

      The alternative, of installing the tube upside down is not possible in most systems, as the tube & the casing are not symetrical.

    3. Re:Did this years ago by Hooya · · Score: 1

      IMNAEE but i think you can flip your image by switching the wires on the back of your CRT. if something blows up -- not my fault.

    4. Re:Did this years ago by Technician · · Score: 2

      For those most inclined to try it... The red and blue wires to the yoke are usualy the horizontal. The green and yellow are the vert. Never turn on a tv without the yoke connected. It is usualy instant death to the horizontal section and a burned spot in the center of the CRT. Use a meter to verify wire pairs. Reverse the leads on both pairs. One pair turns the immage upside down and the other flips it right to left. Due to the location of the high voltage lead on the top of the CRT, just turning the CRT upside down in the set is not a good idea. The CRT connector usualy will not fit after the tube is turned upside down.

      --
      The truth shall set you free!
  55. Vote Here On Impeaching Bush @# +1 ; Correct #@ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    Please reply to this post with Yes or No about
    impeaching President George W. Bush for an illegal
    war.

    Does anybody have any marijuana to share?

    Thank you and have CNN (Cheney News Network)-free
    day!

    1. Re:Vote Here On Impeaching Bush @# +1 ; Correct #@ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

      Why do you think the war is illegal? Congress authorized his use of the military and gave him $40 Billion to do it.

  56. Top Secret Big Screen Simulator by Unknown+Bovine+Group · · Score: 5, Funny

    I have found the plans for the Top Secret Big Screen Simulator that THEY don't want you to see! Banned in 52 states! And I'm not even going to charge you:

    1. Close eyes
    2. Place forehead against monitor
    3. Open Eyes

    Voila! Experience the field of view, the giant pixels, the intense headaches without even having to alter your current setup.

    --
    m00.
    1. Re:Top Secret Big Screen Simulator by yesthatguy · · Score: 1

      Doh. Thank goodness for touch-typing. I can hardly see what I'm writing anymore, but you're right...all the letters ARE really big, I just can't quite make them out. I think I'm going to get a cramp.

      Ah well, off to get some more Advil for this headache. I have no idea where it's coming from.

      --
      Yes! That guy!
  57. Slow News Day? by UltraBot2K1 · · Score: -1, Offtopic
    Normally, I'd expect my Spam Filter to save me from reading this type of crap. Instead, it's on the front page of Slashdot.


    To recap: this is a (bad) idea that's been around for decades. If you want a big, dark, low resolution picture, this is the way to go.

    --

    Slashdot: Open Source, Closed Minds.

    1. Re:Slow News Day? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yeah and your reading and repsponding bozo

  58. what's wrong with selling this? by PTBarnum · · Score: 1

    I view selling this type of information on the same level as selling free software. Effectively the seller is earning his money by finding audiences who aren't otherwise aware of the information and promoting it to them.

    1. Re:what's wrong with selling this? by GigsVT · · Score: 1

      Effectively the seller is earning his money by finding audiences who aren't otherwise aware of the information and promoting it to them.

      You mean like Slashdot and every other newspaper, TV news and web site?

      --
      I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
  59. same guy sold me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    SEAMONKEYS. Now they're all dead, and he won't give me my money back.

  60. re: 100" TVs by blibbleblobble · · Score: 2

    It's always fun to go into the junk-mail folder and look at some of the crap that _somehow_ must seem believable to some people.

    Here's what the site itself says:

    "For entertainment purposes only. This is a FUN site. We make no claim that anyone will be completely satisfied with our product"

  61. The problem by interiot · · Score: 2

    is that if you magnify a TV's screen by a factor of 2, you reduce the brightness by a factor of 4. Magnification factors of the sort mentioned makes the TV too dark to comfortably watch.

  62. All those pixels by ejaytee · · Score: 5, Funny


    This would be great. Right now, I can barely see my pixels. If I could blow them up really huge, I might take the time to get to know each one. Soothe them when they're red, give 'em a hug and a smile when they're blue. Sometimes, just drop by to talk.

  63. I've had this notion.. by GiMP · · Score: 1

    I've considered doing this in the past, but didn't think it would be possible and never bothered investigating. This stuff is old hat, but still something fun to do i'm sure :)

  64. 5 feet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    100 inch is diagonal.
    100 * 3/5 = 60.
    60 /12 = 5 foot tall.

  65. Doubtful but kinda fun by dead+sun · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I remember doing something like what I can only guess is on the site (seeing as its slashdotted now) when I was like 14. Just get a big magnifying glass lens, the type you can pick up at American Science and Surplus for really cheap, get a decent mirror, put your TV on its back, setup the mirror in a box at a 45 degree angle, cut a hole in the side of the box for the lens, put the whole contraption on the TV, point it at a sheet, turn off the lights and viola, really big, crappy resolution TV. It was a bunch of fun as a kid, playing crappy resolution NES games on it though, and an application of physics if you're into that sort of thing (or teaching your kids that sort of thing or whatever)

    --
    If not now, when?
    1. Re:Doubtful but kinda fun by cavemanf16 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, this must be the new craze. Magnify your low res display to huge proportions with a simple snap-on 'radically new' monitor add-on! Please. I saw a similar add for a long time on www.worldnetdaily.com a while back, but it seems to have recently been removed from their front page listings of 'Special Offers' which is usually just a bunch of junk.

    2. Re:Doubtful but kinda fun by lha2 · · Score: 1

      Really messes up the balance of your old-school (c. 1989) Game Boy. Does add "back lighting", though.

  66. Won't work... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm a rising optics major in U or Rochester, and know my share of optics, and would just like to say, that there simply is no way you can make quality, sharp, brigh, 100inch image without precision optical design and parts. Just be cause of limitation's of .. well physics... There are very good reasons 100inch projection TV's are pricy, assuming you dont want a muddy chromlay and geometricaly distorted blob.

  67. Been there, it ain't all that. by stungod · · Score: 1

    I watched the first shuttle launch on this type of setup when I was a kid. My dad knew the owner of a TV/Stereo store who loaned him the fresnel lens converter.

    We had to use a 13" TV because that's how big the hood was, and had to set it upside-down on a table to get the projected picture rightside-up. If we turned the brightness and contrast all the way up, we got a passable picture in a completely dark room. CRT's are made for direct viewing and don't put out enough light to project well.

    So yeah, technically it works, but don't expect the same image quality you might see from even a low-end projection rig. It does make a cool toy for a kid or a cheap science fair project though...

  68. Forget lenses, what about scanning LED projectors? by dschuetz · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I experimented with a similar lens arrangement like 15 years ago with a fresnel lens from an overhead projector. Neat idea, but, well, it sucked.

    I've been wondering for years, and have wondered aloud here before but gotten no response, about the possibility for building a scanning projection TV out of LEDs and mirrors.

    Basically, rather than projecting an entire image at once, like an LCD projector does (and, thus, limiting your resolution to how big your LCD or DLP array is), this would take the output of red, green, and blue LEDs and bounce them off a mirror vibrating in two directions (horizontally and vertically) to provide a raster scan. With today's high brightness LEDs (ever notice how blindingly bright the new LED traffic lights are?), I'd think this could, with the right focusing system, give you a quality image on a decent screen.

    All that remains is to decode the video signal for processing by the projector. In a simple mode, you might even be able to simply take the HSYNC and VSYNC signals and, essentially, use them to mark the edges of your scanning motion, then simply vibrate the mirror back and forth within that time frame. (this is hard to describe, but hopefully it'll make sense to some of you).

    For something like this, the most expensive bit would be the lens at the front. You'd have a bunch of $2 LEDs (running cool and quiet, too, unlike the bulbs in DLP/LCD projectors), a simple electro-magnetic mirror mount (speaker coil for a prototype, maybe?), and maybe $50 worth of electronics.

    Any EEs out there who think this makes sense? Or should I just keep waiting for HDTV projectors to come down to a kilobuck?

  69. Slashdot This... by bziman · · Score: 1
    Since the link in the article got /.'d, you can waste your time by going to 100 Inch TV. And it REALLY WORKS!! I wonder if it comes with Anna Kournikova photos and will earn me $10,000 a month?

    --brian

  70. Re:****ADVICE GRAVELY NEEDED! PLEASE HELP!**** by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    A strict regimen of the goat sex guy should cure any general squeamish you have.

  71. Alternative For Cocaine: @# +1 ; Creative #@ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    Given the "fake" war in Afghanistan to enable
    oil and gas pipelines to be completed in Afghanistan and the "stans" to the north, perhaps,
    President Cheney and President-Vice Bush could get
    some of that Northern Alliance opium.

    Thank you and have tobacco-free day.

  72. What's so wrong with selling information ? by tmark · · Score: 4, Insightful
    I don't like the idea of these people selling this information, especially when you can get it free


    How is this any different than (say) O'Reilly selling books on Perl/Oracle/Linux, when people can get all that information for free on the web as well ? Someone has gone to the trouble of packaging the information, and sending it to people who may not even have web access, or may want printed instructions, so I say all the more power to them.
    1. Re:What's so wrong with selling information ? by frantzdb · · Score: 2

      The information in the O'Reilly books is value-added. All of the information is in one place and easy to find, etc. The information is also available at no cost. In this case it's the ``trick'' that is being sold and little else.

      --Ben

    2. Re:What's so wrong with selling information ? by hoggoth · · Score: 1

      > In this case it's the ``trick'' that is being sold and little else

      For $10 I will send you a book on how to not fall for scam offers that seem too good to be true. The book includes chapters on classics such as "get a 100 inch TV for $10" and "how to not fall for scam offers that seem too good to be true for $10".

      --
      - For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat /dev/random (may take some time)
    3. Re:What's so wrong with selling information ? by cliveholloway · · Score: 1
      "sending it to people who may not even have web access"

      And they buy it from Ebay how?

      d'oh

      cLive ;-)

      --
      -- Trinity in high heels carrying a whip: The donimatrix - there is no spoonerism
    4. Re:What's so wrong with selling information ? by jiheison · · Score: 1

      You forgot, "how to program in Perl."

  73. Frensel Lense eh? by Psarchasm · · Score: 2

    God forbid the light catch this thing just right. Probably burn a hole through your wall... or your cat.

    --
    http://windows.scares.us
    1. Re:Frensel Lense eh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or your penis bird.

    2. Re:Frensel Lense eh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...or your cold grits.

  74. Experience building these. by Christopher+Thomas · · Score: 5, Informative
    I can't get to the linked site right now (I'm presuming it was slashdotted allready), but the way it worked was to basically use a magnifing glass. The screen emmits through a box of a certain size (the screen size), If you put a lense over that, in theory, you could magnify that light, so that it would be large enough to fill a "100 inch" screen, but it would look horrible!

    I would think it would be very blurred, very hard to see (they don't give off THAT much light), and the colours would wash out.

    I'd be curious to hear of anyone's actual experiences in building one of these.


    I built a setup like this as a kid using a fresnel lens and a bed sheet. I even rigged a translation stage for the lens for precise focusing.

    Problems were as follows, in order of severity:
    • Your focal plane isn't a plane.

      Because nothing really acts like an ideal lens, the image focused on to a curved surface. I was using a flat sheet as my screen. This meant that either the center was in focus, or a ring around it was in focus, but not both.

      You can reduce this by using a longer focal length, an aperture, or both, but this is trickier and loses light.

    • My TV distorts colour when turned upside-down.

      I was using one lens. This turned the image upside-down. This meant I had to turn the TV upside-down to get a usable picture. This made the TV image turn funny colours. I have no idea if this happens to most TVs or not. A well-made TV *shouldn't* have this problem - it _should_ only be gravity-sensitive if some of the focusing coils are loose inside it. The electron beam certainly doesn't care about gravity. YMMV.

      You can get around this by using two lenses instead of one, or by turning the image upside-down with two mirrors before projecting it. This adds complexity and takes up space.

      An alternate solution - that I used the first year I did this - is to put the TV flat on the floor and project on to a sheet on the cieling.

    • Fresnel lenses are crappy.

      You get some colour spreading, but not that much. The main problem is that the image will be at least a little blurry no matter what you do. Especially if your lens is like mine and is scratched up from handling.

    • The sheet has to be very thin, or you have to be looking at the TV-side of it.

      Projecting through a sheet degrades resolution, because the sheet scatters light within itself. You can either look at the image from the back (either getting a mirror-image or needing a mirror to flip the image), or use a very thin sheet and view it from the front.

    • The projection is very dim.

      I solved this by hosting my video parties in the basement and covering the windows. YMMV. Real projection TVs have CRTs designed to operate more brightly than normal TV screens.


    These aren't insurmountable problems; just very annoying ones to solve.
    1. Re:Experience building these. by taniwha · · Score: 4, Interesting
      I was using one lens. This turned the image upside-down. This meant I had to turn the TV upside-down to get a usable picture. This made the TV image turn funny colours. I have no idea if this happens to most TVs or not. A well-made TV *shouldn't* have this problem - it _should_ only be gravity-sensitive if some of the focusing coils are loose inside it. The electron beam certainly doesn't care about gravity. YMMV.



      No - but it does care about the angle of the earth's magnetic field .... which is in effect reversed when you turn it upside down. Degausing the tube will help - but really you need either a helmholtz cage or a TV designed for the southern hemisphere (where of course they mostly use PAL so I guess you're SOL :-).



      Back when I worked for a company in the computer monitors biz I learned that monitors for the northern hemisphere are alligned in Japan all facing in the same direction, those for the southern hemisphere are aligned in special cages (virtually facing the same way I guess) - we learned this the hard way after selling some monitors down south and having some really pissed customers

    2. Re:Experience building these. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've noticed that monitors tend to vary depending on which way they face - earth's magnetic field and such. Easy way to screw around with a monitor - swing it 90deg left or right and watch the color convergence change in front of your eyes.

    3. Re:Experience building these. by geekoid · · Score: 2

      This turned the image upside-down. This meant I had to turn the TV upside-down to get a usable picture.

      Why don't you just turn the lens around?

      yes, that was a joke.
      How much distortion do you get using a second lens?

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    4. Re:Experience building these. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the earth's magnetic field is way too weak for any quality-built tv to be affected. go screw a horse

    5. Re:Experience building these. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > * My TV distorts colour when turned upside-down.

      Could also be an overheating issue. Natural convection is taken into account, even with fans. Being upside down would distort that, not to mention that heat sensors to shut things down if overheating (if present) may also rely on natural convection and thus not heat up fully (or too much) when the box is inverted.

    6. Re:Experience building these. by Christopher+Thomas · · Score: 2

      How much distortion do you get using a second lens?

      I never did get around to doing this. I had a glass lens from an old slide projector, but grew tired of the project.

      The way I'd do it would be to use the Fresnel lens to focus the tv picture down to a very _small_ image, and use a second lens to blow that up on to the screen (image size much smaller than the lens's focal length means a closer approximation to an ideal lens). OTOH, I'd still have curved-surface distortion focusing down the TV image.

      If you try it, please let me know how well it works :).

    7. Re:Experience building these. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I was using one lens. This turned the image upside-down. This meant I had to turn the TV upside-down to get a usable picture. This made the TV image turn funny colours. I have no idea if this happens to most TVs or not. A well-made TV *shouldn't* have this problem - it _should_ only be gravity-sensitive if some of the focusing coils are loose inside it. The electron beam certainly doesn't care about gravity. YMMV.


      TV picture tubes are manufactured to work in either a specific North/South hemisphere, or for equatorial use. (There's quite a bit of overlap in these zones) The earth's magnetic field distorts the electron beam a bit, and the phosphor pattern is distorted to compensate for this, depending on where it will be sold. I'm guessing that the problem was reversing the magnetic field, rather than gravity.

    8. Re:Experience building these. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Heh heh, mod that one +funny! I've got a bridge for sale for anyone who believes that! If you are serious, then someone at the company you worked for really had fun with your gullibility.

      The Earth's magnetic field doesn't "reverse" in the southern hemisphere, otherwise a compass south of the equator would point south (assuming a compass needle calibrated to align north-south and painted or constructed to point north).

      Use that amazing 3-D simulator in your head (called a brain) and imagine the north-south magnetic lines of force (there really aren't "lines" of force -- they're just a visualization tool to help us humans understand magnetic fields). See, they run the same direction in Australia as in Mongolia.

      Now it IS true that the "lines" of force do vary in angle as latitude changes, but that's far less of a difference for most lattitudes than the difference simple orientation of an object would make.

      If what you said was true, that monitors and other cathode ray tube devices were affected that much by the Earth's magnetic field, a monitor that was factory calibrated and aligned while facing due east would have big trouble when turned 90 degrees north or south, or even worse, 180 degrees around so it faced due west. Then indeed, the "lines" of force would be intersecting the CRT components in the reverse direction.

      So let's give it a try. Let me show you using this big old console Tv. -Grunt- -Heave- There, 90 degrees, no change yet. -Grunt- -Strain- Aaaack! Help! It went totally black! It must be true! How could I be so wrong! You're right, the Earth's magnetic field DOES make a diff... Hold on... Oops! Sorry, that was the cord coming unplugged. Guess you were wrong after all... (or having a very fun heyday laughing at all the other gullible /. readers).

    9. Re:Experience building these. by FamedLamer · · Score: 0

      So bitter, and yet so wrong.

    10. Re:Experience building these. by taniwha · · Score: 1
      well - that someone was Sony .... to be fair my experience was a while back before they started shoving better magnetic shields (and autodegaus etc) into monitors (TVs are les sensitive, but also are lower cost and have less hardware spent on them) - but the lines of force are not parallel with the surface of the earth - there's a large up and down component too - which IS reversed in the southern hemisphere (think of all those diagrams of the van allen belts)



      Want more proof? try searching for "monitors southern hemisphere" on google, or try this
      link to a Sony website in Australia - not that the monitor has a "Southern Hemisphere Picture Tube"

    11. Re:Experience building these. by tgreiner · · Score: 1
      The electron beam certainly doesn't care about gravity. YMMV.


      It doesn't care about gravity, but it sure cares about the earth's geomagnetic field. If you turn your TV set upside down, you will most likely have to adjust for the reversed magnetic field.

  75. Laser vs Raster Television Images? by AtariDatacenter · · Score: 2

    I looked at this a year or so ago. I have an unresolved question which is slightly interesting. How well would a vector monitor (aka "Asteroids" or "Tempest") fair when projected? The lines are bright, but skinny. Will they be lost in the magnificant?

    1. Re:Laser vs Raster Television Images? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      check out lasermame

      http://games.lasers.org/index.shtml

      I think this is basically what you are looking for.

    2. Re:Laser vs Raster Television Images? by ninth+harmonic · · Score: 1

      I have tried this. My mate has been projecting CRTs for a while. He fully hacks the telly, or computer monitor, as well as using mirrors+lenses (makes beautiful wall size video feedback systems btw).
      So he has his projection setup working pretty well anyway.
      I wrote a bit of software to use this for a vector display which used a PC + sound card into an amp which he had wired to the beam steering coils. I'm not too sure about the wiring.
      We made lovely spirograph images by generating modulating waveforms which control the steering of the electron guns. Also made a program with which you can draw shapes, which are converted into two waveforms, one for each axis, with the intention of reproducing the same shape on the vector display. It only sort of worked though. I couldnt get lines to be straight at any arbitary angle, perhaps because of the non-linear responses of the coils, but then again I probably dont know what I'm talking about ;)
      The thing is definitely bright enough to view in a dimly colored lit lounge room with various other Gizmo-Tronic(tm) laser and lighting effects in operation ;)

      BTW if anyone knows where to get information about converting computer monitors into vector displays I'd love to know!

      Hashish? Absolutely!

  76. OT: Viola? by WSSA · · Score: 5, Funny

    Why do I keep seeing all these instructions for building stringed musical instruments? "Do thing A, do thing B and viola!"

    Or perhaps you mean "voila!" ;)

    1. Re:OT: Viola? by Loligo · · Score: 1

      >Or perhaps you mean "voila!"

      As long as they don't say "wah-lah".

      That one makes my teeth itch.

      -l

    2. Re:OT: Viola? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then get scratching, boy.

  77. You forgot ... by SuperRob · · Score: 5, Funny

    You forgot "hold their hair back when they're Green."

  78. Simple Concept by Carbonate · · Score: 1

    This is esentially the same idea as a school projector. The idea works but TVs don't put out enough light to make a very briliant picture. So you can only watch at night. You also still need a flat white screen to project your image onto. Essentially this is your poor man's big screen. It will never rival a real big screen TV but it will be cool to impress your frineds or at least for a fun physics project on light. Here's a link that I found that contains instructions as well as comments. http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg. tcl?msg_id=0038A5

  79. This is a scam... facts within... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The plans are for a box that mounts in front of your TV set that contains a giant Fresnel lens. These are scams and have been scams for the last thirty years.

    You see those posters on street corners that say "Have a PC? Work from home! $1500/weekly"? This is the kind of crap you'll be selling.

    Why is this even on Slashdot?

  80. Link to plans by sacherjj · · Score: 2, Informative

    I was curious and found a link to plans. Assume it is the same type of design. I'll stick with my projector.

  81. Sad But True by John_Booty · · Score: 5, Funny

    On a similar note... last year, I wanted a bigger TV set, but didn't have the money. So I just moved my couch closer to the TV... yes, I know it's sad. But it has nearly the same effect as getting a bigger set. :)

    --

    OtakuBooty.com: Smart, funny, sexy nerds.
    1. Re:Sad But True by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If your vision isn't great, sitting closer to a smaller sit is BETTER than a large set.

    2. Re:Sad But True by xinit · · Score: 1
      You gave that secret out for nothing. Way to go. You could have made millions on ebay if you'd gone that route first. "MAKE YOUR TV APPEAR MUCH BIGGER"

      Next to penis enlargement, TV enlargement is the next thing on the average man's mind; just ahead of thoughts like "I wonder if that spray on hair stuff really works"

      --
      --- http://foo.ca
    3. Re:Sad But True by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      beer sex pizza

      sweedish twins cheese fries football

    4. Re:Sad But True by John_Booty · · Score: 2, Troll

      "Next to penis enlargement, TV enlargement is the next thing on the average man's mind"

      Oooh! That gives me an idea. Maybe I could have my girlfriend just sit closer to my penis!

      --

      OtakuBooty.com: Smart, funny, sexy nerds.
  82. Cool! by sirgoran · · Score: 1

    Gives a whole new meaning to the Memorex ads. (is it live or is it Memorex)

    Soprano's and Band of Brothers on 100"?

    Then hook that up to the surround sound...

    I'm there!

    Goran

    --
    Carpe Scrotum - The only way to deal with your competition.
  83. GOATSE.CX LINK IN SIGNATURE ABOVE by Anomymous+Coward · · Score: -1

    yea, nobody ever remembers me, but when you get bored, and start reading the porn stories that pop up in the comments today, realize that i'm responsible.

  84. Can actually be way cool by Brontosaurus+Jim · · Score: 1

    A buddy of mine built one of these things, or something similar to them. I don't know about all these people saying the quality sucks, but it was crystal clear for him. And oh god is Quake 3 gorgoues on it...

    The difference is he started with a bigger TV (32"), and used a really high quality lense. I forget what he calls it, but he had in machine made espcially for this purpose. Cost about $700 to have done, but when you consider how expensive a reall 100" would be, it's not that bad

    The thing is, you just can't skimp out like they say you can... Don't use a bedsheet, just a real projection screen, for instance.

    This is totally valid technology, as long as you don't cheap out.

  85. solution:stackable CRTs + expander lens by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Has anyone stacked 4 CRTs and then used mirrors to stretch the images to cover the plastic monitor edges?

    If possible, it would be much much cheaper than stacking 3x3 lcd projectors.

    Heck, even using laptop screens would work as they have much narrower plastic borders.

  86. porn is good, mkay? by Anomymous+Coward · · Score: -1


    This is my first posting ... I have more to share in the

    future if you like this, but must post anonymously, since I am

    a senior manager at a Fortune 100 company and knowledge about

    my extra-curricular activities would cause the end of my

    career.

    It was hot and steamy as we arrived at the airport in

    Brisbane for the long journey home to Boston. This was the end

    of a month-long campervan vacation in Australia, and I, for

    one, was overjoyed to be heading back to some normalcy. For an

    entire month my wife Anne (I call her "the queen") had avoided

    sex in the campervan, or anywhere else for that matter, since

    "the children are nearby." - The irony of her way of thinking

    will be evident shortly.

    Actually, she is not very interested in sex anytime, since

    she was taught by her mother that sex was "dirty." The only

    time she ever saw her parents making love, they were fully

    clothed (hike up the skirt, dear - I'll just quickly unzip.)

    Sometimes I wonder how we ever ended up with three children;

    one is grown and on her own, the two boys (Ralph, 17 and

    Trevor, 14) were with us on holiday. Because I travel

    regularly, I have opportunity for other sexual outlets during

    the year, but four plus weeks within close quarters with a

    demanding uptight woman does not give you much opportunity to

    develop alternatives.

    I had some first class upgrade coupons, but at check-in

    time was told there was only one seat available. Anne

    immediately volunteered because of her "potential for a bad

    back," and was seated in 3A. The boys and I were given 21K/L

    and 22L. This was aisle and window seating in the 2-5-2

    configuration, and the last two rows in the second section. I

    took the single seat, and let Ralph and Trevor sit together for

    the first ten-hour segment of the flight.

    An attractive woman dressed in a loose sweater and very

    tight blue jeans took the seat next to me. I could see that

    Ralph was uncomfortable and maybe even a little jealous, since

    he kept turning around to talk to me, but she was too old (29)

    to be interested in him. She introduced herself as Christine,

    "You can call me Chrissy." She was about five foot eight,

    light brown (almost blond) long hair, a nice ass - firm and

    high, breasts with an impact even through her shapeless

    sweater, and obviously in good physical condition.

    Chrissy was headed for Miami to pick up her belongings from

    a recent divorce; she and her husband had been working together

    on private yachts for eight years, and he had developed a

    cocaine habit. When he would not seek help to end his drug

    addiction, and more immediately after a close call with customs

    in Australia last year, she decided then and there to split

    from him, filed for divorce, stayed in Brisbane, and had just

    been notified the divorce was final. In the meantime, she had

    met another guy she wanted to stay with, and was going to Miami

    to settle up the property and return to her new lover. This I

    discovered during dinner conversation and over a few shared

    glasses of wine. Looking into my eyes, she confided she was

    "now free and ready for some excitement."

    The movie started, the flight attendants went around the

    cabin to lower all the shades, and Chrissy said, "I'd rather

    talk, if it's OK with you; this movie is terrible." I had also

    seen the movie and agreed. We spent the next two hours getting

    to know each other better. Chrissy at one point said, "You

    have terrific eyes, I get really turned on by eyes." We talked

    about the kids, and when she asked if I was married and learned

    about Anne in the front cabin, she thought it displayed selfish

    behavior and then never mentioned my marital status again.

    By now, the boys had fallen asleep, and just before the end

    of the movie, Chrissy excused herself for a few minutes,

    reached into the overhead bin for her carry-on (stretched long

    enough to get my mind focused on her hips and legs in those

    wonderful tight jeans,) and headed to the lavatory in the

    back. When she returned, she was wearing loose-fitting

    sweatpants, and when she asked if I minded if she lifted the

    arm dividing the seats, I replied "Of course not!" By now I

    had an idea of what she had in mind, because she had confided

    during the movie that one of her greatest turn-ons was the risk

    of discovery while having sex. "My husband was not a great

    lover, but in the close confines of the boat it was always

    exciting to fuck without anyone nearby knowing about it; I had

    more orgasms from fucking near other people than from the sex

    act itself." As she shared this with me, she was already

    visibly breathing more quickly.

    Chrissy and I arranged the blankets over both of us, now no

    longer separated, and curled up like spoons in the otherwise

    crowded seats. I started to give her a back rub, slowly

    working over her muscles by now cramped from the first five

    hours of the flight. She purred quietly, and after a while

    squirmed her shapely ass on the seat, pushing it back into my

    growing erection. With both hands I reached around under her

    loose sweater, and fondled her globes, her nipples growing

    firmer under my gentle stroking.

    Chrissy reached back and with one hand released my belt,

    then unbuckled and unbuttoned my pants. I whispered in her

    ear, "How do you do that? I can't even do that with one hand,

    and they're my pants." She laughed, and said, "Years of

    practice; don't worry, it gets better." My hard-on sprang out

    of my tight bikini briefs as she pulled the waistband forward,

    and she whispered, "I'm glad you're not wearing boxer shorts, I

    can't stand them."

    Chrissy began to stroke my cock, now slightly oozing with

    its own lubrication. She used the pre-come to help rotate her

    fingers gently around the head, stroking it with ever firmer

    pressure. I withdrew my hands from under her sweater to push

    my pants down further, allowing me to slip the briefs down

    below my swollen balls, which she now explored with her

    questing hand. Lubricating her fingers even more with her

    saliva, she alternately rubbed my balls and massaged the head

    of my dick.

    My hands were now free, and I hungrily reached forward for

    her erect nipples, shortly afterward sliding my right hand down

    her belly and slipping it under the waistband of her

    sweatpants. She was wearing no panties underneath, and the

    inside of the cotton sweats was already wet with her juices.

    As I stroked her mound, her lubrication welcomed my fingers

    into her warm wet cunt. Rubbing the juices on my fingers, I

    began to circle her clitoris and then used my fingers to stroke

    in and out of her pussy while my thumb pushed against her

    swollen clit. She was breathing harder now, and could not stop

    moving her ass around on the seat, first bucking her soaking

    cunt against my right hand, then pushing her ass back against

    my cock through the sweatpants.

    Just then, the stewardess came down the aisle, paused

    noticeably as she came up to our row, glared at me (me? why me?

    there are two of us here, you know!), almost said something,

    then apparently decided that since we were bothering nobody

    else, she would keep moving. Thank God! While we were both

    close to fully clothed at that time, there was little chance

    she could do anything legally disastrous, but who needs the

    embarrassment, or the hassle from the kids for that matter.

    As the stewardess left, Chrissy whispered. "She knows

    exactly what we are doing, and she's jealous! Now I want to

    have your prick inside me. I'll keep quiet, but I need you to

    fuck me now." With this, she lifted her ass off the seat and

    slid her sweats down below her knees, then separated her legs

    slightly and moved back so I could slide into her dripping

    pussy from behind. I moved slowly in and out as she purred and

    pushed back onto my cock quietly so we would not wake our

    neighbors.

    At the same time, I reached back around to stroke her

    clitoris easily but steadily. The appearance of the stewardess

    had startled me, and most of the urgency for release that had

    built up from her stroking my hard-on had subsided, so it was a

    nice, long, easy fuck, punctuated by her spasming in orgasm

    three times before my cock pressure built up to the point of no

    return. I came with the most excruciating pleasure I had felt

    in my life (actually for the last month, but you know how easy

    it is to lose perspective at the moment.) I felt like I

    unleashed at least a pint of come into her already dripping

    cunt. I sighed, and whispered' "Chrissy, it must have been

    heaven that sent you to this seat. You don't know how much I

    needed that."

    She then turned around in the seat to sit normally, and

    kissed me for the first time. "I needed it just as much as you

    did; you're a terrific fuck, but on top of that it's the danger

    that makes me come so much. Thanks for being here, I dreamed

    that I'd be fucked silly on this trip. As we kissed, I told

    her about my favorite turn-on. "What I like best is eating

    pussy, but there is no room here for that. Would you like to

    go to the back of the plane with me?"

    "What do you mean? In the lavatory?" she asked.

    "Yes. If we are reasonably cautious we can get in there

    without causing an uproar," I replied.

    "I've never done that before," Chrissy explained.

    "There's a first time for everything," I said, and moved to

    pull up my pants and buckle my belt. She thought about it for

    a minute, and then said, "why not, let's try it!" She drew up

    the sweatpants and tied the drawstring (I hadn't noticed there

    was one before - must not have been tied.) Then she got up and

    headed for the back of the plane, with me following directly

    behind.

    She entered the first lavatory, which was vacant (good

    thing the flight was long, and everybody was still asleep.) I

    slipped right in behind her before the flight attendants

    noticed we were even there. As I closed the door, she turned

    and we started to kiss passionately. She broke for a quick

    query, "how do you do anything in this little space?" As I

    untied the drawstring on her sweatpants, I said, "Just lift up

    and sit on the sink, and let me taste your cunt."

    Chrissy lifted, spread her legs, and I could see her cunt

    lips were still swollen from her last orgasm. I gently tongued

    her outer lips, occasionally swiveling my head to nip the

    insides of her thighs, but always returning to circle her clit,

    and as it swelled up, suck on it gently. There was no end to

    the wetness; her own lubrication, supplemented by the enormous

    load of come I had left in her pussy, dripped down both sides

    of my chin onto the stainless steel sink surface and trailed

    down her thighs.

    After tonguing her into a few more orgasms, I realized how

    hard I was getting again, and finally stood up, sliding her ass

    slightly off the surface, and drove my cock into her again

    while we exchanged extremely wet but tasty kisses, flavored by

    both of our juices. Such a short time after the last fuck, and

    she was sooo wet; this time it lasted at least twenty minutes,

    both of us sighing and savoring the overwhelming sensations

    coursing through our bodies. Finally, after a slow buildup

    that I never wanted to end, I came again, not as much this

    time, but she sensed it and started bucking hard just at the

    same moment. The pleasure was so intense it was almost

    painful.

    The light came on to return to the cabin, and after a few

    minutes we were able to adjust ourselves to some degree of

    presentability to return to our seats. Just as we opened the

    door, the same stewardess was looking right into my eyes. She

    said angrily, "Please return to your seats and stay there. We

    have some turbulence and the captain has turned on the seat

    belt sign." I couldn't help but think that maybe we were the

    cause of the turbulence, but then that's just my imagination

    running away with me again.

    As we settled in to the seats, Chrissy pushed the seat

    divider down, saying, "I think everyone is waking up, let's not

    embarrass your boys." The breakfast service was beginning, the

    cabin lights were turned on, and we were again two strangers

    who happened to be sitting next to each other on the plane.

    The secret of our mile-high lovemaking was secure.

    We exchanged addresses, but with her in Brisbane and me in

    Boston it's not likely we'll ever meet again. Both of us

    promised to use caution in contacting each other should the

    opportunity arise, so our current SO would not be disturbed,

    but also promised to get together if possible again.

    I said goodbye to Chrissy at the seat, and went forward

    with the unsuspecting boys to deplane.

    As we got to the end of the ramp in the terminal, I asked

    Anne, "How was your flight?"

    "Great," she replied, "one of the most relaxing ever."

    "Me too!"

    1. Re:porn is good, mkay? by mackga · · Score: -1

      totally lame, asshole. go back to jerking off with the swimsuit issue of si, mkay?

      --

      "shop smart:shop s-mart" ash

  87. where is the porn in the above post? by Anomymous+Coward · · Score: -1

    Alice had been naughty. Her lover was away for the weekend and she was

    bored. When Dave called her, telling you about the concert tickets he had,

    she knew what he wanted, but between the boredom and wanting to see the

    concert (and Dave's build) she went.

    Dave did everything he could to turn her on. He had drinks at his place

    ready before she left. she sat out on the lawn at the pavilion, drinking

    wine. He put his arm around her, and at every opportunity Dave touched her,

    stroked her, patted her, massaged her.

    He spent a good ten minutes rubbing her forearms when she talked about

    typing much of the morning. He spent longer on her back, and the kiss at the

    end had seemed so natural.

    The three that followed were more forceful. She didn't protest when his

    hand began rubbing her breast ... she rather liked it.

    On the way home his hand was under her dress as he drove, teasing her

    pubic mound so that by the time she reached his apartment you were wet and as

    horny as she could remember being. He took her on the rug in his living room,

    and then later in his big bed.

    For Alice, things had gotten out of hand ... and she loved it.

    Dave had continued to maintain possession of either her breast or her sex

    the whole drive home. When they had entered the house he had begun kissing

    her in earnest as he undressed her. His tongue had explored her in ways she

    had always refused to her lover, Mark. Dave had simply been insistent. He

    had tongued her mouth--deeply. He had gone all over her neck, licking her

    ears.

    Alice had always made Mark stop when he had begun that. The sensation was

    too--disturbing. Dave had simply ignored her. That alone had excited her.

    The fact that she was also discovering a new erogenous zone on her body only

    made matters worse.

    Dave had continued. He had tongued his way down to her breasts, and

    instead of liking and sucking the way Mark did, Dave had gone over her whole

    breast, or rather both of them. It was flattering in a way, and just a little

    gross.

    Alice had been deeply aroused.

    That first time in the living room, on the rug, Dave had not even waited

    to completely undress her. He had taken off her bra and shirt, and then

    pulled off her panties.

    With her skirt bunched up around her hips he had forced her over the

    footstool on her stomach and had her from behind, something she had refused to

    allow Mark to do.

    Her inability to control Dave made her feel terribly wanton as she allowed

    him each liberty. She had come almost as soon as he had entered her, her

    skirt still on, on her face, from the rear.

    Dave was taking her like a bitch, she thought. The word "bitch" seemed to

    excite her even more. She repeated it to herself as his hard member shoved

    home, again and again.

    When Dave had come, she had expected to get dressed, but instead he had

    taken her to his bedroom, removed the rest of her clothes and made her assume

    positions on his bed.

    When she had refused, he had simply moved her to the desired position.

    As she showed herself, he had stroked her mound, rubbed her breasts, and

    generally tried to keep her horny.

    It had worked.

    He had gotten her ready to make love a second time by eating her. Alice

    had resisted this. She had never allowed Mark to lick her after they had had

    sex. It seemed so--Wrong.

    Dave ignored her and went down on her, licking her with much more energy

    than Mark did, making her come twice.

    As she reached that stage of orgasm (the first time) when you lose control

    of your body for a few seconds he had slid a finger up her ass and then had

    continued to run it in and out of her in a fucking motion as he licked her

    engorged slit.

    He paid more attention to her pussy than Mark did. He licked the whole

    slit, running his tongue up and down her whole length, even darting in and out

    of her well fucked hole. He knew when he was getting to her and as the second

    orgasm approached he went down on her with a gusto, matching each stroke of

    his tongue with one from the finger in her virgin ass.

    As she came the second time, Dave waited for her to relax and was in her

    in a matter of two seconds.

    She had come instantly, again.

    Dave had settled down for a long screw. He had pulled her knees up to his

    chest. He had pulled her legs straight and put them on his shoulders. He had

    turned her hips on their side, screwing her all the while.

    Dave had come a second time and had barely allowed her to get her breath

    before his fingers were buried in her snatch.

    "He's treating me like a bitch!" She thought. The thought made her hot.

    He had played her body like a violin, keeping her on the edge of orgasm

    for minutes at a time.

    When she had had her fourth orgasm from his fingers, he had presented his

    limp organ to her face. She knew what he wanted and she looked desperately

    for a way out.

    She had gone down on Mark (and to both boyfriends before him), but never

    after sex. She didn't mind a clean cock, but to lick one that had just ...

    That was too much.

    But here was Dave, and she would have to admit that she was bothered by

    something he obviously thought was fine. He had already gone down on her, and

    after coming in her as well.

    Alice stared at the organ. Dave took the back of her head and directed

    her mouth to his cock.

    In the end it was easier to suck his cock than it was to refuse.

    Dave's cock had grown to its earlier proportions fairly quickly. Alice

    was at least fairly sure that he didn't expect her to let him erupt in her

    mouth. When he was hard he had continued to have her suck on him, guiding her

    mouth up and down, setting the tempo.

    Alice had begun to worry when he had pulled it out.

    Dave turned her back over on her hands and knees. She had pulled two of

    the pillows from the bed to put under her arms for support. He had reached

    around and was fingering her slit from behind her.

    Unable to hold still, she thrust her ass back at his cock. She wanted to

    feel his cock inside her and, oddly, she was thrilled to be getting it on her

    hands and knees again.

    The phrase, "Like a bitch!" went on and on in her head as she shoved her

    bottom out to receive his prick.

    Dave entered her slowly. He seemed to want to slow her down, to make his

    strokes as long as possible. After four strokes, he pulled out and put his

    now well lubricated cock against the rosebud of her asshole.

    He had the head in before she had stopped shoving her ass back at him,

    trying to recapture his cock.

    Dave had held her by her hip on one side and literally by her cunt on the

    other so that she couldn't dislodge him. He had kept up the rubbing action on

    her clit continuously so that she couldn't decide if it was painful

    or--terribly exciting.

    Dave continued, in small strokes, to shove his cock back further into her

    ass. She had taken it all.

    "Like a bitch!" She thought.

    He had gone into her to the hilt and rested a moment before beginning to

    fuck her ass.

    "like a bitch!" Alice thought.

    He had made her come from the dual pressure of his hand on her clit and his

    prick in her ass.

    "I'm coming, Like a bitch!'" She thought as her orgasm erupted.

    Dave had kept her coming for nearly three minutes. His hands had had to

    hold her in place to prevent her gyrations from unseating him.

    Finally his spurting into her ass ended things and the two fell in a

    semi-swoon on his large bed.

    Half an hour later Alice had put on her skirt and blouse, her underwear

    stuffed into her purse.

    Dave had driven her home just before two in the morning. She had kissed

    him in the car and walked up her steps to her house feeling very confused and

    very satisfied.

    Seeing Mark sitting in the chair in the living room had nearly stopped her

    heart.

    Alice's dress was wrinkled to death. Even if she had stopped to use

    Dave's bathroom thoroughly, the dress alone would have shown what she had been

    up to.

    Mark stood up and asked if there was any point in his staying. Alice had

    burst into tears.

    Seeing Mark was a shock, but it had crystallized her feelings for her. It

    was Mark she wanted, and she told him that.

    "Mark, I know I've hurt you, but I do love you. I'll do anything to get

    you to stay."

    Mark had stopped. "Really? Anything?"

    "Yes. Anything." Alice had managed to get both sorrow and defiance into

    her voice at the same time.

    "If I stay," Mark began, "I want an end to all your hangups about sex. If

    you can screw around on me--"

    "It wasn't ..." Alice began and thought better of it.

    "You can stop telling me that things I want are dirty." Mark continued.

    "That's the first thing."

    "O.K. Mark, just don't leave."

    "Second, you can spend the rest of the week showing me that you've turned

    over a new leaf."

    "I will, Mark, I will."

    "Third, You'll have to pay for tonight, any way I think you should."

    Alice thought of what she knew of Mark, and decided that she could endure

    anything that he might come up with.

    "Whatever you think is fair, Mark. Just remember I love you." Alice

    answered.

    "We'll see how much. Take off your clothes."

    Alice had been afraid of this. The phrase, "Like a bitch." now had a new

    meaning to her.

    She had turned her back to Mark and taken off her shirt. She hung her

    shirt on a chair, thankful that Dave hadn't been one for hickies. She took

    off her wrinkled skirt with more trepidation. Mark knew she never went out

    without panties.

    "Turn around."

    Alice tried to look demure. It was hard. Not only was she naked, but

    freshly fucked as she was, there were still traces of Dave's come on her ...

    and dripping out of her.

    Alice wished fervently for a minute alone in the bathroom. She didn't

    dare ask.

    "Come here."

    Alice walked slowly to him.

    "Lay across my lap."

    Alice had assumed that he would want to fuck her. A spanking hadn't even

    entered her mind. She could barely remember her last spanking. She had been

    in grade school and her mother had pulled down her drawers and used a hair

    brush on her young ass after finding out about a fight in school.

    With some genuine fear, Alice lay across his lap.

    Mark didn't begin spanking her at once. First he spread her legs and felt

    the sticky dampness there. Alice blushed hotly at the shame of having mark

    examine the evidence of her infidelity.

    Alice tried to hold still as Mark's fingers followed the traces up her

    legs to her sex. His finger went on onto her mound, and after a second, right

    into her well fucked hole.

    It was while Alice was trying not to react to the shame of such an

    examination that Mark slapped her ass for the first time.

    "Count them."

    "One."

    And so it went to twenty-five. With each slap, Mark's finger explored

    more of her cunt. Then with his fingers in her hole, and his thumb on her

    clit, Mark had begun the inquisition.

    He had insisted on each detail of what she had done, leaving out only the

    name of her partner. Alice was so relieved that she held nothing back ...

    for long.

    At each new act, Alice had tried to hide how easily she had allowed

    herself to be used by Dave. Each evasion brought not a new round of spanking,

    but a new level of sensation on her clit.

    By four A.M., weak with orgasms, Alice had told him every detail, save

    one. She had not told him that she had gone down on him after he had fucked

    her.

    At four-thirty, Mark had allowed her a brief respite.

    "I need to tell you some things." Mark had begun, "I believe you want me

    to stay, and that you love me.

    "I believe you will try to change, and I'll let your actions for the week

    speak for themselves.

    "I also know that you're still holding back something. We'll go over that

    tomorrow night. I'm getting too tired."

    Alice crawled up in his lap and kissed him several times. She had never

    come so many times in a single night before.

    "One last thing, "Mark continued, "listening to you has made me horny. As

    long as you're naked, it seems like a waste not to do something about it."

    Mark led her to their bedroom. He stacked pillows near the center of the

    bed. He positioned Alice over them. Standing to one side, he undressed.

    Alice's relief as he plunged into her pussy was short lived as he pulled

    out and slid his variously lubricated cock into her ass.

    THE END--

    But soon to come:

    Alice's Special Week.

  88. My sca^H^H^H deal only costs $5 by athakur999 · · Score: 1

    For only $5, I will show you how to turn your puny 27" TV into a 686mm beast!

    --
    "People that quote themselves in their signatures bother me" - athakur999
  89. Compatability? by Monte · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Will this work with the $10 C.A.B.L.E. D.E.S.C.R.A.M.B.L.E.R that I can build with parts available at any Radio Shack?

  90. My bowels cry out for vengance! by Spooging+Cum-Wanker · · Score: -1
    1. fuck all freaks.
    2. fuck all urban dwellers.
    3. fuck all crazed morons.
    4. fuck all kangaroos (they're just like big rats)
    5. fuck all yellow cowards.
    6. fuck all oprah winfrey fans.
    7. fuck all ugly motherfuckers.
    8. fuck all animals (why not, they're dirty anyway...
    9. fuck all southerners (I hate that drawl, y'all)
    10. fuck all stupid people.
    11. fuck all homeless people (they smell)
    12. fuck all overt, pedantic whiners.
    13. fuck all losers.
    14. fuck all evil fuckers.

    sp00g3!

    --

    News for turds, shit that splatters!

  91. I'm sorry, the above post contained no porn... by Anomymous+Coward · · Score: -1


    I was combing out my hair in front of the bathroom mirror when Mike came

    in. For a brother and sister, we got along pretty well. He was tall and

    good looking, and several of my girl friends were pretty interested in him,

    even though they were the same age as I was (13). Mike was 15 and a

    sophomore in high school, while I was in the 8th grade. I was tall for my

    age and had filled out nicely during the past few years. Several of his

    friends made lewd remarks occasionally.

    Mike and I worked out together in our basement. He needed to be in shape

    for football and hockey, while I was doing gymnastics and diving. One day,

    we had just finished a workout and had each showered. I was standing in

    front of the mirror combing out my recently dried hair when Mike came in.

    He stood behind me and began to comb his hair. When he was done, he put

    both hands on my waist. His hands slid forward to my stomach, then rose

    upto cup my breasts through my robe. I felt a warm sensation begin in my

    belly and a tingling all over.

    "Cut that out, you pervert" I said.

    "Your tits are getting pretty nice, Al" he said huskily.

    "Thanks, I think" I replied, lowering my arms so that they brushed his

    hands away.

    "You know, I saw you spying on me yesterday. I think its time you learned

    a few things."

    With that, he turned me around to face him, slowly undid the towel around

    his waist and let it fall to the floor. I had seen him undressed before,

    but not up close since we were little. His penis was much larger than I

    had ever seen it, huge in fact. Skin covered about half of the large,

    smooth, purple head. It appeared to be about twice as big as his hand

    which he wrapped around it and began to slowly use in a pumping motion. As

    he did, the skin near the tip slid with it, covering and uncovering the

    tip. I was fascinated by the sight and stood there as if rooted. A

    thousand confusing thoughts ran through my mind. My view widened and I

    took in his flat belly with its clearly defined muscles, his chest, broad

    with small dark nipples, his broad thick shoulders.

    He paused in his stroking and stood there briefly with his hands on his

    slim hips. Then he took both hands and reached out to me, letting his

    fingers trail lightly from my cheek downward along my neck to the vee

    formed by my robe. He slowly loosened the sash of my robe and let it hang

    loosely. His hands slipped under the robe to my waist, and slid slowly

    upwards until they cupped my breasts. He rubbed his thumbs over my nipples

    and I could feel them stiffen at his touch. He slowly raised his hands

    taking the robe with it and sliding is off of my shoulders, let it drop to

    the floor. His touch was electric and left trails of fire on my skin. My

    knees were trembling and my legs were growing weaker each time his fingers

    moved on my skin.

    He took my hands and moved them to his cock. Even with the tales and

    stories of my more knowledgeable girl friends, I was not prepared for the

    size and hardness of it. My hand was too small even begin to encircle it.

    I tried to squeeze it to no avail. My knees started to buckle and I

    grabbed him for support. One of his arms went around my back, the other

    swept me up with effortless ease and he carried me out of the bathroom and

    into my bedroom. My hand was still locked in a death grip on his rock-like

    manhood as he lowered me gently onto the bed.

    He straddled my hips, his long torso towering over me. "Look at me,

    closely" he whispered.

    And look, I did. I studied the head of it, noting the cleft on

    the underside and the opening at the tip as he pulled the skin back. I

    could see the loose folds of skin covering his balls pulled tightly up

    against him. Removing my hand from him, he leaned forward and began to rub

    his cock on my belly and breasts, occasionally letting it slap against me.

    The size and weight of it was incredible. I had imagined an erection

    before, but I had always pictured it as thinner and lighter.

    He began a pumping motion again, and a drop of clear fluid appeard at the

    tip. He moved his cock to one of my nipples and transferred the drop to

    it. A few strokes later, a second drop was placed on my other nipple. He

    lowered his head and started licking my breasts, circling the moistened

    nipple with his tongue. His lips then seized a nipple gently while his

    tongue flicked the tip of it. The sensation was electric. Each touch sent

    waves of fire through me. I heard myself sigh as I was unable to take my

    eyes off of him.

    Between my legs it was like fire and ice. I had had feelings of excitement

    before but nothing like what I was experiencing now. The feeling was

    spreading through my entire belly and all my muscles were tightening. My

    back arched as I sought to press my entire breast into his mouth. He began

    to suck on the nipples harder, squeezing each with his tongue.

    He rose up and put my hands back on his cock, guiding them to a pumping

    motion. The tip was very wet and he took one of my fingers and collected

    some of the moisture. Taking the finger, he brought it up to his lips and

    licked it. He then took my hand, moistened my finger on the tip of his

    cock, and guided it to my mouth, applying the liquid to my lower lip. I

    licked at it tentatively with my tongue, not knowing what to expect. The

    taste was slightly salty but sweet. He wet my fingers again and offered

    them to me to lick clean.

    He stroked himself slowly, and lowered his cock to my breasts again,

    rubbing it gently around my incredibly hard nipples. Leaning forward, he

    brushed it against my neck and cheek. My mind was racing with tales of the

    girls at school, how they talked about blow jobs and sucking. I couldn't

    imagine how anyone could take something of that size in their mouth. I

    kept my eyes closed as he used his tool to caress my cheeks, and when he

    brushed it over my lips a "no!" escaped them. Undaunted by my feeble

    resistance, he returned the tip of his swollen shaft to my lips, pulling

    down my lower lip with the ridge near the top. More of the liquid was

    transferred.

    "Lick it" he said huskily.

    I turned my head away but his free hand cupped my cheek and turned me to

    face it again. My lips were now coated with fluid and I instinctively

    licked them. As I did, he pressed forward and I felt my tongue brush

    against the tip of it. The taste was stronger now, and I could smell the

    muskiness of his scent. He repeated his command, holding himself against

    my lower lip.

    With a tentative lick, my tongue slowly traced along the underside of the

    tip. I marvelled at how smooth it was. With a little motion, he insisted

    on an encore and again, my tongue extended. Slowly he pressed it further

    towards my mouth. Opening my lips slightly as if I were going to clean off

    an ice cream cone, I felt his shaft with both lips. My toungue pressed

    against the tip, feeling the small cleft. With gentle pressure, his cock

    slid forward easily until I could feel the ridge pass my lips. My tongue

    was now flat along the groove underneath the swollen tip. He withdrew

    slightly and pressed forward again, deeper into my mouth. Again and again,

    deeper and deeper he probed. My mouth was stretching wider with each

    movement. My hands went to his hips to press him back when I felt the gag

    reflex develop in my throat.

    He backed off slightly and I found my hands exploring his hips and ass.

    The pumping of his hips reacted to my touch. As I pulled on his hard

    buttocks, he pressed forward into my mouth. As I released the pressure, he

    withdrew. I realized that he was letting me control the depth of his

    penetration.

    "Suck on it . . . harder" he moaned.

    I could feel the strokes quickening as I did as instructed. Rather than

    the long, slow strokes of the initial penetration, he was moving faster

    now. I could hear his moans growing in intensity. Suddenly I felt his

    entire body stiffen and a low scream escaped his lips. A sudden jet of hot

    fluid struck the roof and back of my mouth. As I started to push him away,

    another geyser erupted and he plunged his cock deeper. Unable to breathe,

    I felt a moment of panic. I tried to swallow as best I could as more and

    more fluid bathed my throat. I could feel the pulsing of his cock and

    reallized that he was still stroking the shaft slightly.

    As the pulsing subsided, he withdrew slightly, allowing me to breathe. He

    rolled slowly to the side, pulling my head with it to keep the penetration.

    I swallowed and began to sense the taste and texture of his spunk. It was

    much saltier than the earlier fluid and slightly bitter to taste. It clung

    to my mouth in sticky globs and left my mouth and troat feeling dry. His

    hands held my head, keeping my mouth around him as I felt his cock begin to

    soften. I let my head fall to his stomach, and I began to be aware of the

    heat in my own loins. He withdrew himself from my mouth and drew me up to

    lie beside him, cradled in one arm, my head tucked into the nook of his

    shoulder.

    "That was incredible, Al" he whispered. "I have never

    cum that hard before. Are you OK?"

    I sort of nodded against his shoulder, my mind still whirling. His hands

    stroked my back, kneeding and caressing. I felt one hand slowly tracing

    the curve of my hip, sliding along under the top edge of my panties. He

    rolled me slowly over on top of him. His hands were now inside the thin

    fabric, cupping my buttocks. I felt incredibly warm and tight as I lay

    atop him. His hands slid downward, taking my panties with them. One of

    his legs with between mine, and I could feel the hardness of his muscles

    between my thighs. His penis was starting to harden again, and it pressed

    insistently against my lower belly. His hand roamed to my stomach, and

    moved lower. I could feel his fingers entwining the sparse hair atop my

    mound. He seemed to grab a wad of hair and pull it upwards towards my

    navel. The leg between my thighs raised further upwards, pressing against

    my crotch. As it made contact, it was though a stick of dynamite had

    exploded between my legs. My hips convulsed against him and my teeth bit

    into his chest.

    He rolled over on top of me, removing his leg in the process. I suddenly

    felt empty. I felt my panties being drawn down past my knees and off of my

    ankles. His hands traced rings of fire on my thighs, moving higher. His

    fingers probed my wetness, ice against fire. My hips again began their

    involuntary movement, seeking hardness. His leg again emerged between my

    thighs. His hand was insistent as it rubbed and probed. I felt the tip of

    his finger slide into the wetness. As I felt the muscles of my vagina open

    to his touch, searing heat began to spread upwards through my belly. My

    fingers dug into his shoulders, pulling him to me.

    I felt him shift my leg around his, locking my ankles with his own. He

    spread his legs further apart, taking mine with him. His cock was fully

    erect now, pressing into my lower belly. His hands slid up my sides,

    taking my arms and pressing them over my head. I felt totally helpless, my

    squirming doing nothing more than tighten his grips. I felt his body

    shift, his cock dragging slowly over my mound, down along the cleft. My

    body seemed to be shrinking. I felt like I was the diameter of a pencil.

    My legs fought against his to no avail. Then came the pressure as the tip

    of his cock found my wetness. My head was trapped between my arms, my chin

    on his shoulder. I tried to protest but only a moan escaped.

    The pressure between my legs mounted. I felt his legs widen further and

    the pressure increased. Slowly I was taking him inside me. He began to

    move, side to side, up and down. I could feel him slowly stretching me,

    filling me. My hips moved against his movements to ease the pressure. I

    felt even smaller, tighter. One of his hands slid down my back to encircle

    my hips. I felt totally naked. The hand and arm lifted my buttocks as he

    suddenly pressed into me with all of his strength. The muscles of my

    vagina suddenly relaxed and he plunged into my depths. The sensation of

    penetration was overwelming. A mixture of pain, discomfort, and pleasure

    coursed through me, spreading outward from my crotch. The pressure was

    gone, just the feeling of being filled, of being possessed.

    He just held me tightly for a while, not moving. I reveled in the

    sensation. His legs relaxed, allowing me to move. My arms were freed and

    I lowered them to circle his shoulders. He raised his head to look at me,

    silently asking if I was OK. Not sure of how to react, both of us just lay

    there, looking, feeling, joined together. I could feel him pulsing inside

    of me at each movement. I told the muscles of my vagina to clamp down.

    Lightning bolts shot through me as I did. I could feel his breath, inches

    from my face. I drew his head towards mine until our lips were just

    touching. It was as though an electric circuit had been completed. The

    surge of energy coursed through me and I spasmed around him.

    He reacted by pressing against me. I thought he was totally inside of me

    and was unprepared for the thrust. Blinding lights flashed in my brain. I

    could feel myself opening further, taking him deeper and deeper. After

    what seemed like hours, I felt the hardness of his pubic bond meet mine,

    crushing against that secret spot. Explosions wracked me as he ground our

    hips together. Harder and faster he rubbed, harder and faster were the

    spasms that coursed through me. I grabbed on with my arms, my legs, my

    vagina. I felt him pause, letting my reeling senses return. He started to

    withdraw from me and I heard my feeble moan in protest. Like a pile

    driver he plunged again into my depths, sending shock waves through me.

    Again he withdrew, again he plunged. Again. Again.

    His tempo increased, as did the length of his withdrawal and penetration.

    I could feel his heat within me, spreading through me. I felt my own hips

    respond, merging into his rythmn. The waves swept over me, coming faster

    and faster. I heard screaming. I felt the white hot poker plunging within

    my loins. I felt the insides of my body moving, rearranging. I felt like

    a thin sheath around him, taking him, milking him, taking life from him.

    Everything went white with blinding light, and then, slowly, to blackness.

    When conciousness slowly returned, I could still feel him inside of me. He

    was softer now, when I moved, I could feel him slip with the moisture that

    joined us. He rolled off of me, taking me with him to lie on our sides.

    Somehow, he stayed inside of me. We lay there for what seemed like hours,

    looking at each other. On impulse, I brought my lips to his, as if to say

    that it was OK. He smiled and hugged me tighter as we drifted off to

    sleep.

  92. Please include more porn in your posts, thanks by Anomymous+Coward · · Score: -1

    A co-worker said to me, "Everybody's got a broken heart story!" I

    imagine that they do. I had a lot of trouble getting over mine. You'll

    never know how many times I wrote this story, reliving the moments

    described here. This is a true story. In the interest of my good mental

    health it's far past time for me to post this story and delete all copies I

    have of it and be done with it. Don't ask me for additional copies, real

    names or real places. Any mail I receive regarding this story will be

    ignored and forgotten.

    April Fool's Day of 1981 - "Playing the Fool"

    DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD DDDDDD

    I used to work nights at the hospital. I liked how quiet the

    hospital was on night shift. With only a few duties to perform, I often

    read all night long. At the end of night shift would come a beautifully

    still morning, where I could go downtown and take care of daily business

    before most people were awake.

    The only problem with night shift is not being able to sleep with

    my girlfriend, Jane. Because her schedule was opposite of mine, she had

    stayed home all night and would go to work later in the day. The only time

    I had a chance to be with her was early mornings. I treasured these

    mornings we had together. My future plans at the time included not only

    mornings together, but living our lives together.

    I walked softly down the hall in the early morning light, trying

    not to wake my neighbors in the adjacent apartments. I opened the door and

    threw my coat on a nearby chair. I tiptoed to the bedroom door hoping I

    could slide quietly into bed with my lover, Jane. As I neared the door, I

    noticed it was shut. As I stood just outside the door I heard a low

    sounding noise.

    I will never forget what I saw next as I walked into the room.

    That moment will replay in my head for many years to come.

    Laying flat on his back was Joe, my best friend, reaching for the

    sheets to cover his nude body and not doing a very good job of it. Jane

    was laying next to him with her arm and head resting on his large and hairy

    chest. Still gripping his cock in her hand, she continued to stroke his

    length under the thin covering. Both were naked under desert print

    designer waterbed sheets.

    I stood there stunned, like a deer in front of headlights. A

    thousand emotions ran threw me in just a few heartbeats. Time stopped.

    The feelings of jealousy, rage, shame, betrayal, love and hate and even

    sexual interest quickly overwhelmed me. I felt like a flashlight that had

    just been jumpstarted with an arc-welder. My breakers tripped. My fuses

    blew.

    Thought turned OFF. Then a feeling of numbness. I just stood there.

    Joe didn't take his eyes off the ceiling. He just layed there.

    Jane regarded me calmly across Joe's chest. I couldn't see any emotion

    reflected in her brown eyes.

    Slowly, her knee moved under the sheet and slid across his waist as

    she climbed over him. The sheet dropped slid abruptly down as she sat up

    astride his lap, looking down at him for a few moments. Then bending

    forward, she lay on his chest as she kissed him. She moved her small

    breasts across the roughness of his chest. Her kisses became more

    passionate and urgent.

    I saw her hand move between them, reaching down under her.

    Although I couldn't see her hand, I knew she was guiding the tip of his

    erection toward the opening of her sex. Raising her body slightly, she

    supported herself on both arms. Jane arched her buttocks slightly and

    with a dreamy smile pushed herself downward onto him, taking as much of his

    cock inside her as she could.

    I couldn't believe it! They didn't care who was watching. There

    were no apologies offered, no angry words exchanged. They simply IGNORED

    me and continued to fuck each other as I stood there.

    Placing her hands flat on his chest she sat upright, rocking her

    hips backward and forward to work his swollen member deeper inside her.

    Leaning back, she flipped her hair backwards out of her face revealing the

    angelic expression on her face as she made love to my best friend. Her

    enjoyment was obvious as she sat on his lap totally impaled by him.

    Her hands carressed his face and ears, fingers trailing through his

    beard and down his neck towards his chest. Joe was already holding her

    small breasts in his hands, rubbing her nipples until her areolas had

    darkened. His large hands curled about her pale neck pulling her body down

    closer to him, bringing the stiffened tips of her tits towards his lips and

    tongue, kissing and sucking them. Reaching around her shoulders he pinned

    her body on top of his own.

    In a rhythmic and fluid motion only capable on waterbeds, he arched

    his hips upward while he held her tightly, increasing his pace. Jane was

    unable to move her body, except for her hips. She rolled her pelvis

    downward to meet each of his upward thrusts.

    Jane's breath escaped her in small puffs as she bore her weight

    down on top of him, filling her womb with his mammoth cock. The waterbed

    made gradually louder slopping sounds under her movements. The room filled

    with the sweet musk of sex. With her eyes half closed, she bucked and

    writhed against him in pleasure as his enormous cock filled her pussy again

    and again and again.

    Suddenly, Jane's lips parted slightly, releasing a moan. His back

    muscles strained with the effort to drive his cock upward into her. Her

    buttocks slapped hard against his hairy legs while her petite breasts

    bounced up and down. The muscles of her stomach and inner thigh quaked

    uncontrollably as her hips jerked downward, harder and faster, as she

    ground her body into his.

    "Yes..yes..make-me-come," Jane tried to whisper as she attempted

    to regain control of her voice. Her face contorted in the immense effort

    of achieving a colossal orgasm.

    Unexpectedly he reached up to grab her by the waist and flipped her

    from over him to underneath him. Jane cried out when the entire length of

    his glistening wet cock was violently withdrawn from inside her. She

    opened her legs into a wide, flat vee, wanting him to finish her. The

    wetness of her pussy was visible as the folds of her vagina parted and were

    opened.

    "Oh please", she begged. "I want you inside me! Fuck me! Put it

    back!"

    Joe turned to me and grinned evilly. "See! The bitch LIKES it!"

    Positioning himself directly above her, he suddenly shoved the

    length of his long wide cock into her with a loud grunt. Her eyes opened

    wide as she cried out at the intensity of being filled again. Her hips

    jerked upward against his as she wrapped her raised legs around him locking

    her heels across his buttocks, and tightening.

    "Oh..oh..oh-oh-oh-more-faster-FASTER!", she cried with increasing

    volume. "I want you to come inside me!"

    He grunted with each downstroke as he slammed his swollen length

    into her pussy. The lips of her pussy were visibly swollen from the rush

    of blood to her sexual organs.

    "OOOOOOOOOOOOOHHH!", she howled as her hips gyrated under his at

    the pinnacle of her orgasm. Her toes clenched above his buttocks as her

    body contracted under under him. "Come inside me, quickly!", she shouted

    into his ear, and his grunts became louder and his movements quickened.

    Soon, his back arched in ecstasy, pumping his sperm deep into her

    womb, his hips moved as if on puppet strings. Finally he collapsed on top

    of her, obscuring her upper body from my view. But I could see the sex

    soaked lips of my lover's pussy wrapped around the damp softening shaft of

    another man.

    When he rolled off from atop her, they both gasped at the sensation

    their sensitized glands made as he withdrew his semi-erect penis from her.

    Neither one of them even looked at me. She laid still on the bed with her

    eyes closed, breathing fast and hard as if she had just finished a foot

    race. Jane's legs, still open in a wide vee, started to relax and her

    knees fell to lay flat on the bed. The combined juices of their lovemaking

    were slathered over the inside of her legs and made an ever increasing wet

    spot on the bedlinens. She basked in the afterglow of their intense

    lovemaking while Joe lit a cigarette.

    Embarassed and hurt, I left the room. Now that they were finished,

    I hoped she would come out of MY bedroom to tell me it was over between us.

    I went to the bathroom to splash water in my face, hoping it would calm me

    enough to make some new plans in my life.

    SLAM! The bedroom door had been violently shut sending me a

    message that I was no longer welcome here. The click of the lock completed

    the finality of the statement. As I stood in the bathroom staring into the

    mirror, I heard the headboard start to rhythmically bump the wall adjacent

    to the bathroom.

    Jane's moans, muffled through the wall, signalled that she was

    well on her way to another climax. I didn't have to see her to know that.

    I knew intimately well how she made love to a man. I can still see her in

    my mind's eye. I picked up my coat and keys and left.

    1. Re:Please include more porn in your posts, thanks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WOW, thats hearfelt. Man, I hope you're doing OK, thats quite the story. I hate to be so brunt but Jane is a bitch, get over her. Find someone elso who respects your feelings and loves you back.

      Broken Heart,
      Detroit

  93. What about LCD? by andylaurence · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Whilst ripping apart an old lapop a couple of weeks ago, it struck me that the heart of an LCD screen is just a glass panel. After thinking about having moving pictures on the wall, I came up with a possible idea.

    Take one OHP (Overhead Projector), and one LCD screen. Remove all packaging on the LCD screen until you can see through it. Place the LCD screen on the OHP and hold down with some masking tape. Turn on OHP and LCD (make sure it's connected to something!).

    Any comments as to why this won't work? I work out costs at around £400ukp new (£300 for LCD screen, £100 for projector).

    1. Re:What about LCD? by Bonker · · Score: 2

      I've seen these, but can't find them anywhere for sale. Basically, it's just exactly what you're describing... An LCD monitor with a clear screen and no blacklighting behind it. It sits directly on top of the overhead projector of your choice with no special adapters or fitting. A college math professor was using one to graph equations. It was 94, so it was monochrome. Surely these still exist. Anyone know for sure?

      Also, there were several popular graphing calculators that came in a 'regular' version and a 'clear' version for use on an overhead projector.

      --
      The next Slashdot story will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and slashdot the links early!
    2. Re:What about LCD? by babymac · · Score: 1

      Products like this are already on the market...or at least they were. My geometry teacher in high school (in 1989) used a rig exactly like the one you describe in your post. She projected her work on a screen instead of using the blackboard. It was pretty neat technology back then.

      --
      "War makes me sad." - Me
    3. Re:What about LCD? by CaptCosmic · · Score: 1

      They had these when I was in high school. You hooked it up to a computer or VCR and placed it on the overhead projector. The problem we always had was that the intensity of the overhead projector always washed out the image. Made it tough to see what the teacher was trying to show us.

      --
      -> Capt Cosmic <-
    4. Re:What about LCD? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am pretty sure that texas instruments made something like this for their calculators.

      http://education.ti.com/product/accessory/vs/fea tu res/features.html

      So yes they do.

    5. Re:What about LCD? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I work at a media department on a college campus, and while we have mostly moved to lcd projectors, we still have a couple devices similar to what you mentioned. They were something like $10000 when we bought them in the stone ages, but they do work. I had some chances to test them last year. The image looks like crap, and can't be made bright enough to be worthwhile, especially for a class. We used a really bright overhead projector.. Still crap.

      Not worth the time ;)

      Tony

    6. Re:What about LCD? by arbitrary · · Score: 1

      Actually, IBM offered a laptop some time ago that was able to be placed on an OHP (Overhead Projector.) The model, if I recall correctly, was the Thinkpad 755CDV, and sported a 10.1" TFT display with a removable back -- remove the back of the display, and voila! Instant OHP LCD display.

      Rather nifty, me thinks.

    7. Re:What about LCD? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I did this about a year ago.

      I bought a Sharp LCD projector for $150 from ebay plus a virtually brand new OHP for £50 from loot.

      Total cost including shipping ~£200.

      The sharp LCD is pretty cool, it's got VGA, SVideo and Composite video inputs, and a remote control, 800x600 resolution, takes PAL + NTSC signals (and sound too, but I use my stereo instead).

      I've got my PC, DVD, VHS and OnDigital (digital set top box) connected to it, and I have a 6ft diag. screen. Because of the size of the LCD panel, the quality is excellent, it's easy to clean, and stray hairs/fluff doesn't get magnified like it does with a dedicated projector and its crappy little LCD. Because the OHP has separate optics you can choose one that fits your needs, mine has fixed zoom but was v. cheap. It's pretty bright too, you can see the picture without curtains unless it's sunny. You can also anti-alias the picture by de-focusing slightly.

      There are lots of interesting things you can do with this, G-force with line in from a mic gives very hypnotic (real!) wallpaper. FPS and driving games are great, you get some peripheral vision if you sit close, which makes for a much more immersive game.

      In fact, a I've just bought another LCD panel for a friend who say mine and asked me to help him set one up, it cost about £90 + £15 shipping, this one is "only" 640x480, but still higher than TV resolution, and it has a back light, so you can use it as a monitor if you so desire (it also came with a PCMCIA drive so he's apparently going to fill it with JPEGs, hang it on the wall and use it as a picture frame also!).

      The downside? The OHP gets through lamps quite quickly (I think that's my mains voltage) - I get about a month from a bulb using it three or four hours each day, they cost £6 each. Also it's not as neat as a dedicated projector unit. And you have to find somewhere to hang the screen.

      Anyway hope this was of interest, I'll post pics if anyone is interested....

  94. why is there no porn in your reply? disturbing by Anomymous+Coward · · Score: -1

    Third of the "Deb's Tails" series. There are more in the works; Deb has

    told me several others, I just need to find the time to write them down.

    This was last posted only a couple of weeks ago. Please don't flame me, I

    got a couple of requests for it, and since I was reposting the others, it

    was just as easy to repost this one as to mail it to those who asked.

    My wife, Deborah, often tells me "bedtime stories" of her sexual

    adventures. Some of them I know are true, either because I was there, or

    because she has corroborative evidence. Some of them, I'm sure, are

    fictional. Others, I'm just not sure about.

    I don't know about the truth of this one. It sounds like the kind of

    thing she'd do if she were in the right mood, but since I wasn't there, I

    can't vouch for it.

    If you've ever heard anything about the New York subways, you probably

    think you know what they're like. Noisy, obnoxious, and crowded. Most of

    the time that's true, but as any New Yorker will tell you -- once you get

    past his pride in living in the least livable city in the country -- that

    some trains can be practically empty if you pick the right times and

    routes. Many evenings, around 10 or 11, even the busiest routes start

    emptying out, and by midnight it's sometimes possible to have a car to

    yourself.

    In all fairness to New York, though, it does have it's good points.

    The Circle Line is one of them. It's a mini-cruise around Manhattan (it is

    an island, you know!) Any place that's got a decent-sized body of water

    has something similar. Seattle has trips around Puget Sound, New Orleans

    has riverboats running along the river. The Circle Line cruise is really

    beautiful at night with the city all lit up, but in the middle of winter,

    you can -- and probably will -- freeze your ass off.

    Deb and I often have separate social lives -- an inevitable reaction

    to work-related gatherings where people sit around and talk shop. What

    usually happened in New York was that I'd stay home and play with my

    techie-toys while she was out partying with her colleagues, or she'd stay

    home with a book while I was out cheering for the Mets. Naturally, that

    meant a few solo subway rides for both of us, often at somewhat odd hours.

    This is the story of one of those trip as Deb told it to me (albeit,

    with my title).

    Let Your Fingers Do the Riding

    I never did tell you about the aftermath of that party last month did

    I? The one that ended up in a ride on the Circle Line? Yeah, that's the

    one, when I didn't get home until around two. I was so pissed at you about

    that. Going to bed before I got home wasn't nice. I'd been hoping you'd

    still be up so I could fuck your brains out, and there you were, sound

    asleep in bed with MST3K blaring away on the TV. Why was I so horny?

    That's what I was going to tell you about.

    When the boat got back to the dock, we were pretty much partied out,

    and I, at least, was frozen stiff. We all went our separate ways, which

    for Gary and me meant heading straight for the uptown number 1 train. It

    turned out that he was frozen too, so once the train showed up we decided

    to try a little hypothermia treatment. We had one of the sideways sets of

    seats next to the car door to ourselves -- in fact we damn near had the car

    to ourselves. He sat down right next to the barrier between the seats and

    the door, and I sat in his lap, with his coat buttoned around both of us.

    Once I started to warm up a bit, I realized that Gary's lap was not

    the most comfortable place I'd ever sat -- somehow you never realize just

    how bony someone's legs are until you sit on them -- and I started to

    squirm around, trying to find a position that didn't include a bone poking

    me. Not surprisingly, this had something of an effect on him. I suppose

    you could say that I warmed him up a bit. The net result, though, was to

    make his lap even worse as a chair. If he wasn't poking me, I was

    squashing him, and all-in-all, I think we were both a bit relieved that

    Gary had to get off the train at Times Square and head for the E out to

    Queens.

    Losing my butt-warmer did have a few advantages besides easing my

    seat. Most notably, I could sit sideways on the seats, lean my back up

    against the barrier, and try to make my knees a little more comfortable by

    straightening them out in front of me. On the other hand, I did miss the

    warmth he had been providing, so I did what any normal person would do: I

    pulled my arms out of the sleeves of my jacket and hugged myself inside it.

    By 50th Street I was warm enough to realize how frustrated I had been with

    a hard cock against my ass and no time or opportunity to do anything about

    it.

    Without even thinking about it, I reached down, slipping my hand

    inside the waistband of my skirt, and began to rub my pussy through my

    panties. I was already wet, and after just a moment or so of rubbing, I

    knew that wasn't going to be enough. I was about to slip my hand into my

    panties, figuring to get a finger or two into my pussy, when I realized

    where I was. I took a quick look around, and was a little surprised to see

    that there was only one other person in the car: a guy sitting all the way

    down at the far end, his nose buried in a book. I only hesitated a second

    before I lifted my butt and slipped my panties off. I had my arms back

    into the sleeves of my jacket, my feet on the floor, and my panties in my

    jacket pocket seconds before the train stopped at 59th.

    As soon as the doors closed, I turned sideways in the seat again,

    putting my back towards the guy at the other end of the car, lifted the

    front of my skirt to my waist, and buried a finger in my pussy. Ahhh,

    heaven. My eyes closed involuntarily as I began to slide the finger in and

    out, rubbing the palm of my hand across my clit. I was rapidly approaching

    orgasm, when something made me open my eyes. A man was standing in the

    aisle about ten feet away, his eyes riveted on my crotch, the bulge in his

    pants clearly showing just what he thought of my little show.

    I froze, my on-coming cum evaporating. Not that I have any objections

    to showing off, quite the contrary, in fact. It was just the

    unexpectedness of it; thinking I was alone, and then discovering I had an

    audience. Seeing that I had stopped, he looked up from my pussy and our

    eyes met. Neither of us even breathed for several seconds, until, finally,

    he broke the silence.

    "Sorry to disturb you," he said, in the most incredibly gentle voice

    I've ever heard. He sounded for all the world just like someone trying to

    lure a strange kitten into coming over to be patted. "I saw what you were

    doing from the next car, and I just couldn't resist coming over to this one

    for a better look."

    What can you do when you're faced with a gentlemanly apology like

    that? Especially in New York! I did the ladylike thing. "Why don't you

    have a seat?" I said, pointing to the seat beyond my feet. Since I was

    sitting sideways, that seat was maybe five feet from my head, no more than

    two feet beyond the tips of my toes, directly in line with my pussy; sort

    of the pornographic equivalent of first row seats right behind the goal at

    a hockey game. "Perhaps you'd like to open your pants and do likewise?"

    "Thanks. I think I will," he said, with a sudden smile.

    The train was pulling out of the 79th Street station as he settled

    himself in the seat and opened his fly. He winced a couple of times as he

    worked his rock-solid cock out of the opening. They aren't the most

    maneuverable things, are they? Especially when you've got those silly

    jockeys to deal with.

    "Very nice," I told him, quite honestly, when he had it out and

    comfortably nestled in his hand. As he began to stroke it up and down, I

    resumed finger-fucking myself, thinking how silly I must have looked,

    carrying on a conversation on the subway, with a complete stranger, all the

    while with a finger deep in my pussy. After a minute or two, I switched to

    a masturbation style better suited to showing off, spreading my pussy lips

    open with my left hand, and rubbing my clit with the fingertips of my

    right.

    "Yours is very nice too," he said, his hand moving faster on his

    shaft. "You don't suppose we could..." His voice trailed off, as he tried

    to think of a good way to suggest that we stop fooling around with this

    masturbation stuff, and start fucking.

    I hesitated for a moment, wanting a cock inside me, and tempted by the

    drop of pre-cum that was just beginning to run down the underside of his

    cock head. "Probably not a good idea," I finally replied, regretfully.

    He shook his head sadly. "Damn. I'd love to sink my dick into that

    hot cunt of yours." His hand moved faster and faster (and so did mine!),

    and his breathing got rougher and more ragged. "Hot and wet," he moaned.

    "Shit, I'd love to eat you, you look so good!"

    I closed my eyes again for a moment, imagining my fingers were his

    tongue, sliding back and forth over my clit, and then that they were his

    cock, as I plunged my index and middle fingers as far into my pussy as they

    could go, and then began to finger-fuck myself frantically.

    My eyes flew open as I heard him cry "Oh, shit, YES!". I was just in

    time to see the first spray of his cum shoot up into the air. I watched it

    rise and fall in a perfect parabola, seeming as if it were in slow motion.

    As it reached the peak of its arc, I knew what was going to happen, and

    happen it did. His load came down directly on my lower leg, splashing hot

    and wet, and then running down to my ankle and onto the seat. The feel of

    his cum was the final straw for me, and I cried out as my own orgasm washed

    over me.

    I began to come down from my peak just as the train started to slow

    for the next station. "All that between 79th and 86th?" I thought, just as

    the conductor announced "Hunnerd 'n' Tenth Street. Next stop Hunnerd 'n'

    Sixteenth." We had made four stops, and I hadn't even noticed!

    "Hundred and Tenth!" my partner exclaimed. "Oh, shit! My stop was

    96th!" Simultaneously, he leaped to his feet, stuffed his cock -- still

    dripping with cum -- back into his pants, threw a quick "Thanks a lot,

    Lady" over his shoulder to me, and leaped out the door just before it

    closed.

    I waved to him out the window as the train started up again, and then

    started thinking about how much fun I was going to have with you when I got

    home. One more stop, a couple of blocks walk, and then I was going to tell

    you the whole story, and then fuck you silly.

    I nearly froze my pussy walking home from the subway stop, because I

    was in too much of a hurry even to put my panties on; I didn't want to have

    to waste time taking them off when I got home. I gave the doorman one hell

    of a show when I slipped and fell on the wet marble in the lobby, nearly

    killed myself when I slipped again getting out of the elevator, got inside,

    and then discovered you were asleep! Fink!!

  95. TI does that by wiredog · · Score: 2

    Something like that, for it's digital movie projectors. Costs an arm and both legs for the projector.

  96. please include descriptions of nudity in your post by Anomymous+Coward · · Score: -1


    You've just turned off your COMEputer after reading all of the messages. You

    decide it's time for you to go to bed. As you climb between the cool sheets, I

    can tell what you're thinking. I know what you're thinking.

    You can't see me but there I am. Standing in the shadows watching and

    waiting. As you turn off the light, I wait patiently for you to go to sleep.

    My heart is pounding wildly against the thin fabric of the gown that flows over

    my naked body. Covering all that is there that will make you stiff. I want

    you. As I watch you drift into a half sleep, I long for you. I move from my

    hiding place slowly across the room to the bed which you lie upon.

    Your breathing is even and slow. I gently nudge against your bed, shaking it

    only enough to make you turn over to gaze at me with half sleepy eyes. My hands

    slowly move over the roundness of my breasts, down to my smooth stomach

    carressing my hips, my thighs. As you watch me you wonder how I have gotten

    here to where you are, but you really don't care. I gently crawl on top of the

    bed just next to you. My fingers rest gently upon your lips as I gaze into your

    eyes you know what I want.

    My fingers move from your lips slowly to your neck as I bend to kiss you with

    my soft, full lips. Softly and gently my tongue enters your mouth as your arms

    come and enclose me, pulling me towards you. I can feel your heart beating

    against my chest wildly. I break the kiss only to slide my lips to your neck so

    they may lick and pull on the skin where I feel your pulse beating rapidly. My

    fingers carress your chest, my nails tracing a pattern from one nipple to the

    other.

    Gently flicking it just enough to feel your cock stiffen against my thigh.

    My mouth soon follows. Leaving a wet pattern with my tongue, I move down to

    your stomach, slowly. My eyes steadily watching you watching me. As I kiss the

    insides of your thighs, your cock is positioned directly in front of me,

    standing there waiting for my mouth to attack it. But I won't! I want you to

    feel everything.

    I want you to feel everything that is being done to you. My tongue slowly

    and wetly licks little circles pulling your balls into my mouth, so warm, so

    wet. The sensation is about to drive you out of your mind.

    I encase your cock with my lips, starting from the bottom of your shaft,

    moving very slowly upward to the very tip, and back down again. Your hands are

    clutching the sheets as I see beads of sweat start to fall from your forehead.

    Your eyes are closed.

    Your hips moving up and down trying to force your cock into my mouth.

    Sticking out my tongue firmly, I purposely and slowly lick the hard vein

    underneath your cockhead, flicking it back and forth as you beg me to take you

    inside my warm, wet mouth. And I do. Swirling my tongue around the head which

    is very tight, and very purplish in color, I clamp my lips firmly just around

    the head moving my head back and forth.

    As if I were sucking on a baby's bottle I increase the suction causing you to

    plead for release. Not yet, I want you to go insane. I push my head down just a

    bit further so I can rub the sensitive head against the roof of my mouth

    pushing your cock deeper until you're just at the back of my throat.

    In one swift motion I have you deeply imbedded in my mouth as my tongue wetly

    swirls all around your hot, throbbing prick. Your head is thrown back, the

    moans of pleasure which come from your throat is nothing compared to what I

    feel happening within my own body. I gently remove your cock from my mouth.

    It's so swollen, glistening with my saliva. It looks as if it's about to burst!

    I lie on top of you kissing your forehead, eyes, nose, your lips, dangerously

    sucking your tongue. I know you want to come and you shall, but not yet. Your

    mouth finds my nipple, sucking it between your teeth. Ooooh, your mouth feels

    so good on me. You're holding me so tight, running your finger along my very

    wet slit, in a position where I couldn't move if I wanted to.

    You start to tease me with your cock, putting it on my clit, rubbing it back

    and forth as I beg you to put it inside me, but you don't. You want me to beg

    you, you want me pleading half crazed from the pleasure I feel. I rub my pussy

    against the head of your cock letting you feel my wetness, moving back to

    capture just the head if not all into my hot steamy, lust filled hole. You push

    your hips up and I feel your cock head spreading me apart, entering me.

    My pussy contracts involuntarily as you force your way in. Your fingers

    digging into the cheeks of my ass. I cry out, ooh, your cock feels so good

    sliding into me. As I feel you enter more and more until you're snug and

    deeply inside my pussy.

    My fingernails dig into your chest as I rotate my hips on top of you, around

    and around slowly grinding. My mouth sightly open as I cry out from your deep

    thrusts. We stare at each other as if in a hypnotic trance.

    Your movements become more aggressive, your cock is soaked. My cunt juices

    dripping down the sides onto your balls. You pump me faster as I move on top of

    you, my rhythm matching yours. Your hands roam my body, squeezing my tits,

    pinching my nipples while my fingers play with my hard swollen clit. I use my

    pussy to suck on your cock, squeezing it, pulling it as you buck under me

    wildly.

    I lean over only for a moment to whisper into your ear very softly, "Fuck me

    Gary, don't hold back." With one swift motion, you turn my over onto my back,

    throwing my legs over your shoulders. Your cock savagely rams into me. Your

    body is moving faster. Your cock sliding in and out, grinding into me with

    animalistic passion. Moving deep within me, your cock swells even more.

    I wrap my legs around you pulling me closer, deeper. We're both going mad,

    so mad we lose all self control. Your breath comming in heavy gasps as if some

    unknown entity has entered your body to take complete possession of you,

    driving you insane. Then you feel it, we both do. You feel the deep ferrocious

    tingling in the pit of your stomach.

    As I grind my cunt up into your groin, your teeth are biting into my neck.

    Your balls ache from being so tightly filled with come. I feel them slap

    against my ass as I reach down and slide my fingers over their smoothness,

    tightness. Your whole body starts to tremble, as you feel a sharp tingling

    chill shoot up from the base of your spine. My clit is burning as if on fire. I

    beg you, " Move your cock faster Gary. Ohhh, yes, that's it ... harder, ram

    your cock into me. Move it faster! Slam it into me. Tear my pussy apart with

    your cock!" You sound like a wild animal. Your moans, groans and gasps become

    louder and more fierce as I feel your cock twitching and I feel your cock

    twitching and jerking inside my cunt. Our bodies shake, tremble and become

    lost. We are no longer people, only two mad, crazed beings begging for

    release. Your body spasmodically jerks on top of me and mine under you, as we

    are bathed in the flash of white light which hits us both.

    Our heads spinning as the last moments of our pleasure finally subside. You

    look up as I slowly emerge from your bed giving you one last kiss very deeply.

    I want you to remember. You close your eyes and drift off into a very peaceful

    sleep as I go back into the darkness from whence I came.

    --

  97. I saw one of these in use... by Byteme · · Score: 0, Redundant
    ...when I was at a party at Alex Chiu's apartment.

    Great experience, it was like watching a Monet.

  98. Fucking animals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll
    Our government has yet to responded to the threat of international terrorism.

    Their reposnse is not strong enough. Instead of striking back with EVERYTHING WE'VE GOT (biological, chemical AND nuclear weapons!), they waste their time building "alliances" with the unchristian people who are untrustwothy by nature.

    This lack of resolution can be traced to the long period of reace time between the WW-II and the WW-III we're fighting now.

    Compared to the previous war, we are pitifully handicapped by our concepts of "morality". Back in the 1940s we interned our slant-eyed enemies with no qualms and prevented an uncounted number of terrorist attacks by these sworn bastard enemies of our white race.

    Now all the ethnic arabs, blacks and god-knows-what- europeans are running free in our great country. Free to poison our water reservoirs and contaminate our blood supplies with their AIDS infected blood.

    The terrorists do not have moral. In fact, they are not human beings and should be treated as such.

    I call on you, free white Americans, to take action against these criminals. You have to do it on your own since our government seems to lack the strength to accept the reality and imprison, torture and kill these animals.

    Don't let yourselves be fooled by the weak enemy within who keeps crying: free speech, human rights and free religion. There is no free speech during war. There are no human rights eithre. Finally, there should be no free religion. The pagan religions are the root of all evil and should not be tolareted. Our money and Constitution says: In God we Trust. That God is not the satanic Islamic god. It's the merciful Christian God!

    Now, if ever, is the time for WHITE NATIONAL UNITY! To preserve our nation, faith and way of life: find and kill the enemy within!

    1. Re:Fucking animals by Teko · · Score: 1

      Drat. I clicked this hoping for some tasteful and intelligent bestiality, and all I got was a lame supremacist rant.

  99. I tried this once... by sailracer6 · · Score: 1

    Well, I saw this ad on ebay six months ago, and realized it was nothing but a fresnel lens magnifiying a TV screen. I happened to have a really small one sitting around so I tried projecting my 5" B&W beast onto the ceiling. Well, it worked, but all the lights had to be off and even then it was a very dim picture and hard to keep in focus. It was about 100" though. A word of warning: I ordered some larger Fresnels from Edmund Scientifics to continue experimenting, but their focal length was way too long for them to be of any use. If you're going to try this, make sure you understand optics better than I do.

  100. I do think we're winning by Sunken+Kursk · · Score: -1

    No new news for over an hour and 20 minutes now folks. Timothy, Hemos, Katz, and friends are all shaking in their boots right now.

    That's right boyz, we 0\/\/|\|Z j00!

    --

    When I became a man, I put childish ways behind me.

  101. unless protista.com servers porn, your post sucks by Anomymous+Coward · · Score: -1

    What do I think about when I masturbate? Funny you should ask.

    Sometimes I masturbate while looking at porn mags or watching porn

    flicks so I am thinking what it would be like to actually be one of

    the people in the picture or movie. I am an exhibitionist at heart

    so it would be a real turn on to be naked and/or having sex while

    others watched. I am always the "doer" not the "doee". I am the one

    sucking the cock, eating the pussy, fucking the girl or getting

    fucked in my ass. I also get turned on by the idea of being watched

    while I jerk off. Many times I have masturbated by an open window,

    pretending not to notice that I could easily be seen by all who

    cared to look. Sometimes I have even gone out of my way to make

    sure that someone was watching. The best example of this is when I

    was in Spokane for a conference two years ago.

    .........

    The morning session of the conference was incredibly boring so

    I was going to skip the afternoon part. I wanted to take a nap,

    shower and check out the city. When I got to my room I quickly

    stripped and jumped in the shower. I came out of the bathroom after

    a nice long relaxing shower wearing a towel around my waist. I

    picked up a "What to See and Do in Spokane" book and sat by the

    window. I was on the 24th floor of a downtown hotel and the window

    was a big picture one with a big sitting area in front of it level

    with the bottom of the window.

    I sat against one of the walls and stretched my legs out and

    checked out the view. Down below the city was hustling and bustling

    like any other Friday but somehow the window acted like a barrier

    between me and the ruckus below. All around me were other high

    rises, they were fairly close but I couldn't make out any of the

    activity within them. Above them loomed a clear blue cloudless sky,

    truly a perfect day.

    I then started wondering if people in the other buildings ever

    caught glimpses of naked bodies in my hotel. How many times had

    they seen a couple making love or lounging around in the buff after

    a shower or masturbating. Then it occurred to me that perhaps they

    had seen me naked when I was getting ready for my shower. Perhaps

    they should see me masturbate too!

    After seriously checking out the area around me for any obvious

    means of causing trouble and making sure my door was locked I again

    sat down on the ledge, minus my towel. At first I sat with my knees

    pulled up to my chest and my cock hidden between my body and my

    legs and looked out the window. It felt incredible, the sun was

    beating against the window and covering me with warmth. I was

    wondering if I would have the guts to go through with it when I

    finally said "What the hell" and lowered my legs.

    There I sat, naked in the window for all of downtown Spokane to

    see. Slowly my hands crept towards my semi-erect penis. I like to

    start masturbating before my cock gets hard so I can play with the

    foreskin. I pull it all the way back and watch as my pink cockhead

    comes into sight and bends down slightly. As I was doing this I was

    totally engrossed with the pleasure it was causing and completely

    forgot where I was.

    I like to tease myself at first, I just stroke slowly until I get

    hard. Then casually continue, in no hurry at all. When I get hard

    I continue to pull the foreskin all the way back and forth so it

    rubs against my glans and gets the precum flowing like a river.

    Only after doing this for awhile did I look out the window and

    remember where I was but by this time I did not care.

    I spread my legs wide because I like to feel my balls bounce

    against my crotch. I did this by the window and began beating off

    really hard totally oblivious to all who might be watching. I like

    to stroke really hard and alternately tense up and relax, this

    causes my balls to slap against my crotch and then stop. Combining

    this with a tight grip around my the head of my cock easily brings

    me to climax quickly. As I got closer and closer to my orgasm my

    breathing got heavier and I began to gyrate my hips as though I was

    fucking the air. Usually I slow down to delay my orgasm a bit and

    prolong the experience but there was no stopping this cum.

    My whole body twitched and I arched my back and shot spurt after

    glorious spurt of warm cum into the air. I heard the first few

    shots splatter on the wall behind me and then felt the rest

    splatter on my chest and crotch. I continued to stroke as I eased

    back into the sitting position. The remaining cum began to dribble

    down my cock onto my hand so I used it as lube to stroke the rest

    out.

    I licked the cum of my hand and began to play with the globs of

    it on my chest. It was really warm, almost hot and was thick as

    syrup. I reached for my towel and wiped off my chest and cleaned up

    my dick. As I got up I noticed my cum that had hit the wall. I

    thought about it for a second and decided to put on a "grand

    finale" for any spectators that I might have had. I bent down and

    licked each glob of cum off the wall.

    I barely made it to the bed before I fell into a deep sleep.

  102. Re:****ADVICE GRAVELY NEEDED! PLEASE HELP!**** by Guns+n'+Roses+Troll · · Score: -1

    bwahahaha you asshole, I'm reading this at work and couldn't stop laughing. The image of a sexy green eyed beauty with a "... gaping, caulifowered bunghole staring out at me ..." was too much. My advice would be to slice off the offending skin and serve it to her parents as a roast beef. Anyway, congrats on your new catch.

  103. ...empirical data says no by victim · · Score: 4, Informative

    IANAEE, I got tired three credits short, but...

    Consider a hypothetical tv show which displayed a solid, bright, red background. Your red LED would need to put out enough light to illuminate your screen bright red. Now, take your Photon microlight out of your pocket. (Surely all slashot readers have at least one of those by now. Ultra bright LED on a keychain.) Sit in a lit room and shine the microlight on a white surface, adjust the distance from the surface until your red (or white, or whatever color your microlight is) spot is about as bright as you would like the TV to be. Compute the area of the spot on the white surface. Mine is four square inches with a white microlight in a dim room. Maybe calibrate your idea of brightness by looking at your TV up close and then comparing to your illuminated spot.

    Using the `no free lunch' rule of physics, you need to admit that a single LED is only going to provide enough light to adequatly illuminate 4 square inches. Hence, a 100" tv (4800sq in) is going to take 1200 LEDs. The way bright LEDs are something like $3 each in huge quantity, thats $3600 before you add optics, mechnical oscillators, and electronics.

    1. Re:...empirical data says no by dschuetz · · Score: 2

      IANAEE, I got tired three credits short, but...
      (me, neither, but I gave up after I noticed I only did computer-related homework for two semesters. :) )

      Using the `no free lunch' rule of physics

      Heh. You probably don't believe in perpetual motion, either. Heathen.

      you need to admit that a single LED is only going to provide enough light to adequatly illuminate 4 square inches.

      Good point, and I agree heartily. However, I'm not suggesting you use a single LED to illuminate an entire image -- you SCAN the image, and rely on human image retention in the eyeball to make it look like a solid image. That'd be one key question -- whether you can scan fast enough to do this. You might even need to double-scan images (twice per visual field) or somesuch.

      Also, you could (and probably would) use a 3x3, 6x6, or 9x9 array of LEDs per "pixel" to get the brightness up a bit, too...

    2. Re:...empirical data says no by jiheison · · Score: 1

      I have absolutely no business discussing anything realted to EE but. . .

      Doesn't the "scanning" aspect of the original poster's idea eliminate the need for an array of LEDs? In effect, wouldn't it be like waving your single keychain light around a larger than 4 square inch area, but fast enough so that you don't notice the motion?

    3. Re:...empirical data says no by cananian · · Score: 2

      Um, no. If you wave the LED around, then its brightness goes down. Think of it this way: it's only turned "on" for the amount of time that it is actually at the spot you're looking at. The rest of the time it's busy pointing somewhere else. Persistence of vision isn't some magical cure for this. The apparent brightness of a scanning LED will be a tiny fraction of the brightness of the
      steady LED.

      --
      [ /. is too noisy already -- who needs a .sig? ]
    4. Re:...empirical data says no by Spy+Hunter · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Scanning the spot across a large surface wouldn't make the large surface appear to all be as brightly lit as the spot - it would make the whole large surface appear to be dimly lit. For retention to work the image must form on your eye first, but if the image is only in one position for a fraction of a second, it won't get formed in the first place.

      Why do TVs work then, you ask? Well, the phosphors on your TV are individually much much brighter than an LED shined on a surface from some distance away. Also, the phosphors continue to glow for some time after the electron beam has already passed.

      --
      main(c,r){for(r=32;r;) printf(++c>31?c=!r--,"\n":c<r?" ":~c&r?" `":" #");}
    5. Re:...empirical data says no by Edward+Kmett · · Score: 2

      The point that the reply was trying to make is that the 'bright' LEDs aren't bright enough when scanned over that large of an area, you need one that is (using his math) 1200 times brighter given the amount of area that the LED can effectively illuminate. If you sweep an LED over a wider area all you get is the same amount of light spread over a wider area. Sweeping the light doesn't magically make it put out more light.

      You could do this with wimpy little keychain lights and some fancy optics, but the picture would be Real Dim (tm).

      --
      Sanity is a sandbox. I prefer the swings.
    6. Re:...empirical data says no by CaveBot · · Score: 2, Informative
      Good point, and I agree heartily. However, I'm not suggesting you use a single LED to illuminate an entire image -- you SCAN the image, and rely on human image retention in the eyeball to make it look like a solid image. That'd be one key question -- whether you can scan fast enough to do this. You might even need to double-scan images (twice per visual field) or somesuch.
      So you are going to use the LED to illuminate one pixel at a time. For a 640x480 screen there are more than 300,000 pixels. At 30 frames/sec, each pixel is going to be illuminated for around 0.11 microseconds.

      The problem is the eye has an integration time of about 1/30th of a second, but the pixel is only illuminated for 0.11 microseconds. This is equivalent to integrating the same illumination level for the 0.11 micro second time. But when you are just shining the LED on the wall you are integrating to the full 1/30th of a second. The let's assume the illumination level is 1. So the integral for the Photon on the wall is 1 integrated for 1/30 of a sec or .033. For your scanning LED the integral is 1 integrated for 0.11 microsencond or .00000011. For a given pixel size, this means you need to make the light 300,000 brighter if you scan it than if you don't if the eye is going to see the same amount of light.

      Your TV solves this problem by having a phosphorous surface on the back of the screen. A powerful electron beam excites the phosphorous and then moves on. The phosphorous holds the image while the electron beam is elsewhere.
    7. Re:...empirical data says no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This calculation is simplistic and flawed.

      you don't need 3600 times the power output to create an image of reasonable size. The persistence of an after-image on the retina will allow you to illuminate only a small area at a time, as long as the scanning rate is fast enough, to create the illusion taht the whole screen is displaying an image, as opposed to simply a bright spot moving from left to right.

      in fact, this is how all CRT TV's work. They would stop working without the persistence of vision thing.

      -Reg

    8. Re:...empirical data says no by Phrogz · · Score: 2
      Hence, a 100" tv (4800sq in) is going to take 1200 LEDs. The way bright LEDs are something like $3 each in huge quantity, thats $3600 before you add optics, mechnical oscillators, and electronics.

      That's for a single-color TV, yes? You'd need RGB LEDs, to be able to cover the necessary brightness across the spectrum. Provided your other math is right, we're talking $10,800 at this point, no?

  104. nothing new by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This idea has been around forever. I don't remember when it came out, but I'm going to guess around 94 there was a 64k demo out on the demo scene. It was called acidwarp. I still have it somewhere. acidwarp.exe and after it's done running, it tells you how to build this. I made one, you just have to buy the fresnel lense for about $4 or so, and find a cardboard box to put it in. I only use it for showing geiss or other visualization programs on a screen in my room. The focus isn't good enough for watching movies/reading subtitles/browsing the web.

  105. WTF? by CaptIronfist · · Score: 0

    This has to be the worst scam i've ever seen on /.

    "Here come see, read our reviews we are the best but the shit we're selling you, can't see it. You have to pay to see it first, and our screenshots there all unexisting files. Of course.... Oh and BTW! feel free to click on our tons of spam generating links. Click on our banners we need your clicks also, bla bla bla..."

    Look, it's simple, bigger isn't better.

    The satire form of expression is the most wonderful one in the world.

  106. Found another free one by dozing · · Score: 4, Informative

    I found another site with the instructions for free. This one hasn't been /.ed yet so have fun: http://www.ductape.net/~bradya/100inchtv/

    --
    Dozings.com -- Its kinda funny... If you're as crazy as me.
  107. No need to reverse by Catskul · · Score: 1

    There is no need to reverse the image in a addition to turning it upside down. You only need to invert the vertical and invert the horizontal.

    Turning it upside down effectivly inverts the vertical and the horizontal at the same time.

    Think about it. Top becomes bottom, and left becomes right.

    --

    Im not here now... Im out KILLING pepperoni
    1. Re:No need to reverse by RadioheadKid · · Score: 1

      Well it depends on whether you want to do front projection or rear projection, then you may or may not have to reverse the picture.

      KidA

      --
      "Karma can only be portioned out by the cosmos." -Homer Simpson
  108. What this is, how it works, and doesn't... by cr0sh · · Score: 5, Informative

    Has anyone ever taken apart (or seen the inside) of a big screen TV? Do any of you youngins remember the old big screens from the 70's and early 80's?

    The picture display tubes used in typical big screen TV's are in reality nothing more than liquid cooled versions of the tube used in a typical TV. These tubes are liquid cooled (on the front - it is a passive cooling - think of using water as a heat sink, with no pump) because they are driven to insane brightness levels (way brighter than maximum brightness on a normal TV set), to get the picture as clear as possible in the final result. Furthermore, most big screen systems use three tubes, one red, one blue, and one green (they are black and white tubes with filters - not unlike stage gels), each aimed and focused separately to get the highest resolution picture possible (this seperate aiming, etc is one reason why you should have your big-screen adjusted after moving it - even if it is across the room). HDTV sets merely use ultra high-res SVGA tube systems to get the resolution needed.

    After that step, it is simple optics - most of the time no more than one or two largish glass lenses (with anti-chomatic aberation built in) and a mirror or two to flip and reverse the image - sometimes the image is projected inverted and reversed and bounced off of one mirror to get the final image. The idea is to get the projection as near parallel with the screen as possible. Where that isn't possible (due to the size of the cabinet), special lenses are added (or it is done electronically) to "keystone" the image in the proper direction so that it comes out "square" in the end.

    That is all - amazing, isn't it, that one would pay almost 2000 bucks for a few TV sets, some wood , and some optics? Well, you do get a better quality system, and the optics are top notch, too - plus, the TV sets are anything but normal...

    What these 100 inch plans and systems try to do is do all of that on the cheap - a light tight box is built around the TV set, a fresnel lens is added (it is a cheap lens), and you turn the TV set upside down and add a mirror to reverse the image. Typically, you might also crank the brightness up to get a slightly better image for the larger 100 inch displays.

    What does this get you? Actually, if you do everything perfectly (and watch out turning that set upside down - sometime the magnetic field of the earth screws things up, and you need to degauss the set to recover in the upside down mode), have it all aligned, use a good fresnel lens, a good lighttight, square, painted black inside box with a nice mirror, and you use a larger set (15-19"), and a good projection surface (not a sheet - not enough reflection - ideally, you want a silver beaded projection screen, for maximum gain - but since it would be stupid to spend $150 on a screen for a $10 big screen, there are alternatives, more on that later) - you can get a reasonable image. You will have to turn out the lights, and let your eyes adjust - but you will get a watchable image. It isn't a scam. The edges will tend to be fuzzy, though, because a fresnel lens isn't a perfect lens, and has focus issues at the edges. Put a black border around your projection surface to mask these off, and things don't look too bad. Also, don't try to go for a 100" display - try a 40" display first, and adject until you are happy with pixel size and clarity. It is possible to make it look damn good, good enough for most entertainment uses.

    Now, want to know how to make a better projection TV system (though this time, it will cost a bit - more than $10, but less than $500)?

    LCD projection systems are really systems designed to rip the gullible off. At least with CRT projection, the manufacturers have an out with the special CRTs and optics they use. LCD projectors, though, are the simplest of them all (note, DLP projectors are not LCD projectors, so I can forgive their cost) - it is crazy that they sell these ultra expensive projectors that are nothing more that glorified slide projectors...

    That's right! Slide projectors! The optics and light system are the same (nearly equal) as to what is in an "old-time" slide projector - the slide now is an LCD panel! This panel is typically rather small for it's resolution - but this doesn't excuse the cost, because LCD production quality is supposed to go up as the size goes down, and the price is supposed to go down as well, right? Well, it hasn't - at least I don't know where I can get a $150.00 800x600 LCD projector yet, which typically uses a smaller LCD display (less than 2" diagonal). Anyhow - all one has to do to build their own LCD projector is to get an LCD about the size of a slide, and drop it in place of the slide in a slide projector (which can be bought cheap off of Ebay). This kind of projector system was first described by Robin Cook in his book "The Virtual Reality Homebrewer's Handbook". One thing he recommended was to use a fan to cool the LCD, because the projection lamp could overheat the LCD, causing it to shut down or burn out. What is used for the LCD? Why, an LCD TV, of course - you take one apart, remove the backlight (because the projection bulb will be your backlight), and put the screen in place of the slide in an old slide projector. You also need to re-route the electronics and cabling, but it can be done. Also, try to use a TV with a TFT display for clearest moving images. It is also possible to scale this up by using larger LCD displays (various electronics surplus dealers sell $99.00 4 inch LCD displays for use in in-car video systems), and a custom lens/projection system. A larger LCD will give a clearer image.

    Now, what will be the quality of such a system? All I can compare it to is a device I have, that works the same way, and is how I got my "Big Screen" experience cheap. I own a Fujix P401 LCD projector - cost me $250.00 a few years ago, and gives me an "OK" picture. I can comfortably display X on it if I use a 640x480 setting - some things are readable - but mostly I watch VCDs on it (using mtvp - anyone know of an equal Free replacement to mtvp?). Higher res images can be displayed, but they are fuzzy, at best. I would imagine a homebrew system to be comparable to this, possibly better.

    Now, would it be possible to reproduce a three tube CRT system? Of course! You could build three of the 100" systems, but use black and white sets with colored pieces of plexiglas (or stage gels) in front of them. It would be a little bulky, though. I could imagine gutting some small (9" or smaller) portables to do this, and building a custom cabinet. Another possibility is to get (through various electronics surplus retailers on the net) surplus big-screen optics (which shouldn't cost more than $25.00/ea), and put them in front of the CRTs you are using. This would result in a more compact system (especially if you removed the casing of the TVs - be careful of the high-voltage inside, though - one hand in pocket when poking around inside those sets!!!).

    Now, what to use for the projection screen - well, since you are doing this on the cheap, you can't very well buy a nice screen - they can be expensive. However, sometimes you can get a used silver projection screen fairly cheap (under $50.00 sometimes on Ebay, less at garage sales) - but make sure it is good quality. Most of these are tripod style, and don't have a ratchet mechanism to allow a "pull-down-from-ceiling" setup, that is much more enjoyable. To solve this, use what I used: A pure-white blackout shade. These can be found at Home Depot, and they can be had for ultra-cheap prices (less than $30.00 for the largest size). You can build mounts by using some bolts and a couple of bookshelf brackets, with careful setup, a pull down system is easy (I had mine together in an hour). These shades are smooth, have a high reflectivity, and are very inexpensive. Another alternative is high reflectivity white paint on a board. You can also use a white vinyl shower curtain, stretched tight. There are numerous options. Just look around and imagine.

    Finally, I want to tell you what I used to display X under Linux on a TV (or projection system with composite input, like these homebrew projectors use). There is a device called the Averkey iMicro that is a true plug-and-play system. Pop it into your VGA port, load up X, and it will recognize the settings - no need to mess around with your XF86config settings (unless you need a certain res) - high-res, low-res - don't matter - it can recognise it. And it gives a great image, and it is cheap (around $100). I highly recommend this product.

    OK - now you know the scoop. I hope this long, long comment will help someone. Realize that you won't get the be-all and end-all of projection images with these systems. However, I don't think they are a scam - in reality, they are selling the lens and some plans, and true, as good or better plans could be found on-line. But people are lazy, so I tend to think that they are selling a lens, some plans, and the cost of research - for $10.00 or less in many cases, that isn't a bad deal. I tend to wonder if I compiled all the info I had onto a CD, and sold that with a lens, if I could make some cash - but I am lazy, so if someone else wants to take a stab at it, go for it!!!

    Have fun, my friends!

    --
    Reason is the Path to God - Anon
    1. Re:What this is, how it works, and doesn't... by cr@ckwhore · · Score: 1

      Excellent information! Thank you...

      A great source of cheap LCDs for building a projector is from those little handheld TVs. I've got one from Radio Shack that is a few years old and is the perfect size to fit into a slide projector. Some of those LCDs could probably be wired directly into your cable, satelite, etc. Even better if you have a tuner or cable box for changing the channel with a remote. The result will be an awesome projection system for wicked cheap!

      --
      Skiers and Riders -- http://www.snowjournal.com
    2. Re:What this is, how it works, and doesn't... by cr0sh · · Score: 2

      Correct! That is what I was trying to imply, but I didn't mention it for some reason - my mistake. Thank you for pointing it out.

      Many of these LCD TVs can be had cheap now, in many cases under $100.00 - Fry's, RatShack, others sell them all the time. One thing you have to be careful of as you take them apart is getting the electronics and backlight separated from the LCD - many times they are glued or metal tabs are soldered, plus there is a VERY thin ribbon-style cable connecting the tuner/output board to the LCD , which is easy to break or tear, from what I have read. Plus, be careful of the high-voltage power supply for the backlight on the LCD - these are dangerous as well!

      A good source for those larger LCD displays are:

      http://www.eio.com/

      and

      http://www.EarthLCD.com/

      --
      Reason is the Path to God - Anon
    3. Re:What this is, how it works, and doesn't... by Darlock · · Score: 1

      So, if I am getting you correctly, could you take a bigger/higher-res LCD, (ie from a laptop) and build a high quality projector from that. Using a bigger lense mind you.

    4. Re:What this is, how it works, and doesn't... by cr0sh · · Score: 2

      In theory, yes - but you would have to work out how to drive such a thing properly.

      --
      Reason is the Path to God - Anon
  109. Point: technically TV's have no pixels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    Alot of people have remarked that the pixels would be huge. I just wanted to point out that television and television CRT's are innately analog and have no pixels. The scan line is drawn in one continuous swipe horizontally across the screen. I'm not arguing that the image would be great, I'm sure it wouldn't be, but I don't think it would be as grainy as alot of you suppose.

    I would imagine that the issues here would be with brightness more than grainyness. Large screen televisions are limited to the same basic resolution as small screen televisions are, the source data, a.k.a. the video signal, is sent at the same resolution to all TV's. Televisions have 525 vertical scan lines, but horizontal resolution is difficult to describe in terms of pixels as they are different for the chroma and luma components. The luma ( brightness, i.e. black and white ) horizontal resolution is 442, the chroma ( color ) horizontal resolution is 377. This was done for a number of reasons, including bandwidth limitations, backwards compatibility with black and white televisions, etc... If you take this overlap of color and black and white signal, then add the fact that the vertical scanlines are interlaced ( vert refresh is 60 Hz, i.e. 30 frames per second ), you will see that standard television is not at all similar to computer monitors. Televisions are very low definition devices ( thus the need for HDTV ) and that low definition means that a magnified image might benefit from the shortcomings of the human eye.

    Please note that all my numbers were for NTSC, most PAL implementations run at 50Hz vertical refresh, 625 vertical scan lines ( chroma and luma horizontal resolutions vary amongst the PAL standards ). SECAM is 50Hz, 625 lines as well.

    Also note that this is for standard TV, HDTV used MPEG-2 just like DVD video and thus is obviously a digital format.

  110. Re:you know what 640x480 on a 21" monitor looks li by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The way one uses a tv vs a monitor are different, I tend to sit kess then 3ft from my computer display but perfer to watch our 50in toshiba from accross the room. So even if your picture is a bit grainy its not like you'll see it all that much unless your vision is like 20:10 or something inhuman.

  111. Works, but annoying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Used to have a 486 laptop designed to double as a projection system. You could remove the plastic back from the display and lay the computer on an overhead projector. It was a generic make. (Sunflower?)

    The biggest problem with it was that the screen sat an inch or so above the normal focal plane of the projector. You couldn't rack the lens up high enough to focus, especially if you were trying for a big image. Other problems were the result of the flimsy generic hardware: cheap telescoping aluminum legs to prop up the laptop base, weak fans to keep the LCD cool... Very mickey mouse. Used this for a year before talking the boss into a more expensive but more convenient InFocus.

    With sufficient use of duct tape and some kludging of the lens, I expect this would be an improvement over the "100-inch TV" projection method

  112. Trailer Park Matinee by Redneck+Genius · · Score: 1

    Sweet, this means I can blow up old Dukes of Hazzard reruns onto my trailer wall, and charge my friends $$$$ to view them. Nothin like some Pat's Blue Ribbon and a good flick on a hot, tuesday afternoon. I may even accept food stamps.. wow thanks!

    1. Re:Trailer Park Matinee by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      that's Pabst

      philistine

  113. Been there done that by shepd · · Score: 1, Offtopic
    --
    If you could be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you could be told what to say or think - BoC
  114. Re:Forget lenses, what about scanning LED projecto by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The problems are in the physics. TV's can get by with a very small number of electron guns because they are extremely fast - they move the dot around at frequencies in the tens of kilohertz. This is a smidge higher than most reasonable mechanical systems would even think of tolerating. [handwaving approximation: 10KHZ ~= 600,000rpm]

    So to trade this off, you can have a pile of LEDs, except that the LED's aren't exactly small. Especially the spiffy new ones that www.lumileds.com / www.luxeon.com are coming out with. In order to get an image out on the wall, you need to dump an optical system in front of the LEDs, and big LEDs means big optics (unless you start trading off efficiency/complexity/cost by hiring a smarty-pants optical engineer).

    Its not exactly a small/simple task, but there might be room in there for a reasonably useful system.

    Personally I'm poking around a diode-laser based vector graphics using some of the small micromotors (few mm diameter) that are pretty common nowadays. mmmm. wall sized emacs session.

  115. Buyer beware by Sebby · · Score: 1
    They'll sell anything on eBay, even links to websites that offer their services for free.

    --

    AC comments get piped to /dev/null
  116. Screen Discoloration by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "My TV distorts colour when turned upside-down"

    Tv's are balanced for the magnetic poles of the region of the world that they are to be operated. When you flip a TV over the earth's poles are reversed causing the discoloration.. The same can be said for monitors. The cure is to degauss the screen. Most current TVs will do this automatically, but you might have to power on and off several times.

  117. Re:Forget lenses, what about scanning LED projecto by pz · · Score: 1

    Your idea has merit. But -- and this is a big one -- there would be a ton of design work necessary.

    I've worked with galvanometrically-controlled mirrors (the kind used to make x-y projectors for laser display systems). Cool stuff. Very, very expensive for good ones, and to get a nice, clean picture, you sure would need a set of good ones. Why? Think of the simplest monochromatic case where you want to project a single LED (or laser) in a scanning path. Any slight deviations from perfectly straight lines in a regular array during the scan will appear as distortions in the image. Getting a motor to track so that a projected dot moves not only at a constant rate on a screen, but also does so without any substantive deviations is difficult. In my lab at Caltech, we spent well over $10,000 building a very similar system, although ours was for projecting static images rather than dynamic ones. The lengths you must go through to get something that is usable are remarkable.

    To get decent response time (in merely 10s of ms; for video you'll need better) you need special ultra-light mirrors and big heavy motors. Speaker coils are designed to move speaker cones, not mirrors which weigh 1-2 orders of magnitude more. Also, the controllers for such things are non-trivial and must be carefully tuned for the individual load. Don't expect to slap together a 100W audio amplifier from some design book and expect it to work in this case. The loads are very different.

    To get decent mechanical rigidity for such a system, you will need an optical bench, and a friendly machinist who is willing to make high-accuracy parts. You can skimp on things like the supports (we used a wooden frame), but if, for example, the two X and Y mirrors are 89.95 degrees apart instead of 90.00, you get a mixed trapezoid and parallelogram image that will need to be corrected in the decoder. We ended up using independent first-degree corrections for each axis; we should have used a two-dimensional, second-degree (parabolic) correction.

    Because such things are also going to be sensitive to temperature variation (remember, everything expands when it gets hot), you will also need a heating system and nice controller for it. The gavanometer controllers we used also had a nice heating system built in that kept the motors at 40C, independent of what we were doing to them.

    That said, you can probably do a crude job with
    surplus equipment, as scanning mirror assemblies are often used in photocopiers, printers, and the like, but it's not the kind of thing you can do in a weekend. Getting an image that would rival a middle-of-the-road DLP/LCD projector would take a very long time and a lot of effort.

    Getting spinning mechanical things to achieve the kind of accuracy to get reliable pixel-by-pixel resolution without distortion is not easy. Not impossible, but definitely not easy.

    -- pz.

    --

    Put my fist through my alarm clock with its ding-dong death inside my ear. - The Blackjacks.
  118. purst fost1 by jsin · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    yeah baby, it's all good beeyotch!

  119. Laser? by mikeee · · Score: 2

    Suppose you used a middling-sized laser rather than an LED: could this be bright enough? (Monitor burn-in is an issue, though. :)

    Alternately, instead of a pixel-mapped display, you could use this scheme for a vector display (anybody remember those?). Trickier to drive, but potentially a lot easier to get enough brightness.

    1. Re:Laser? by FFFish · · Score: 5, Funny

      Lasers? Good god, man, you'd get wall burn-in! Imagine how embarassed you're gonna be when you freeze-frame the money-shot, and end up with it etched in your wall just a few hours before your mom comes over for Thanksgiving dinner!

      God forbid the cat get in the way. Poof!

      --

      --
      Don't like it? Respond with words, not karma.
    2. Re:Laser? by Chris+Y+Taylor · · Score: 2

      You mean this:
      http://www.mitsi.com/Projects/alp.htm

      I heard a story (I have no idea how true it is) that a bunch of engineers for a TV mfg. company built a giant laser projection TV to demonstrate at the company picnic one year. Supposedly it worked great at first, but after watching it for a few minutes it would give people headaches. They didn't know why, so they never made one again.

  120. To quote (or paraphrase) Kermit... by srvivn21 · · Score: 1

    "it ain't easy bein' green."

    And yes, I ment the frog. Not the file transfer protocol.

    Ribbit

  121. The Slashdot double standard by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    I don't like the idea of these people selling this information, especially when you can get it free from the good people at BSTV

    I don't like the idea of Red Hat selling Linux, especially when you can get it for free from the good people at Debian.

    I don't like the idea of record companies selling cds, especially when you can get them for free from the good people at Gnutella.

  122. SLASHDOTTED! Can we prevent this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Here is an idea --- cache a website in multiple places, THEN release the story/cool new product/file/whatever while linking to the cached info.

    I sure would like to visit the webpage and read for myself all of the interesting details.

    What do you think? Too difficult?

  123. Screw television. A 100 inch Freznel = Anarchy! by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 3, Funny

    Screw television.

    Here's what I think would be fun:

    For about $100, you can buy a 48"x36" freznel lense. I want to mount it in a giant magnifying glass frame with a long handle, (kind of like one of those leaf scoopers used to clean the crud from the surface of suburban swimming pools.).

    Then. . . Oh boy the damage you could cause!

    We're talking about being able to set on fire, with a dowel and a sheet of plastic, the upholstery inside parked cars, punishing stupid owners who leave their automobile anti-theft devices blaring unattended. --Without even having to touch the vehicle! --Or you can set office buildings on fire by shining sunlight through the windows just by walking down the side walk with the magnifier over your shoulder. Any number of bizarre fire-crimes become feasible.

    Yeah, yeah, I know you could get the same net effect with a can of gasoline and lighter, but this is FAR cooler! (What!? I'm just walking here with my sheet of plastic! I don't care about optics! Get your filthy law enforcing paws off me!) And if you somehow managed not to get caught, the authorities wouldn't know what the heck to make of it. --You might even be able to popularize the term, 'spontaneous office furniture combustion,' or something equally weird.

    Of course, in this day and age of too many cameras and rampant terrorist paranoia, you'd probably have your eight foot magnifying glass and turban confiscated.

    Bummer.

    Fantastic Lad --What's a little pyromania among friends?

  124. Re:Forget lenses, what about scanning LED projecto by smoyer · · Score: 2, Insightful
    I have been involved in the CATV broadcast business (as an engineer) for 10 years and believe that I can provide some information that will help your proposed development.



    A TV scans across (the horizontal refresh rate) the picture tube at 15.7 KHz. The mirror would have to match this rate to reproduce a picture from a convention broadcast facility, so it would have to vibrate across the chosen field of view 15,700 times per second. I don't know the physics involved behind making a mirror move that fast, but it sure would sound awful, since its vibration would cause compression waves in the air at a very high pitch.



    The TV scans from the top of the screen to the bottom (the vertical trace and retrace) 60 times per second. The mirror would therefore also have to deflect up and down 60 times a second. In my opinion, that makes the mirror movement pretty complicated.



    Don't despair, all is not lost! I remember seeing an early head mounted display that used a column of pixels and a mirror that vibrated left and right 60 times per second. I think that a pretty good image could be created by making a row of 640 clusters of LEDs (each cluster being 3 LEDs - a red, green and blue) and scanning the mirror up and down 30 times per second (Only 30 instead of 60 because you can paint both the odd and even frames at the same time). There would be some electronics involved, since the horizontal picture image must be captured and store in the LEDs. This also has the advantage of providing way more light than 3 LEDs, so you'd have a brighter image.



    Good luck

  125. Howstuffworks: fresnel lens by NeVR-C · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Some great infos and links on howstuffworks.com

    http://howstuffworks.lycos.com/question244.htm

    --
    - Curiosity is not a default !
  126. Any size you want for just $19.95!!!!! by jpellino · · Score: 1

    I used to sit in the dining room and watch the TV in the next room thru $20 binoculars. It looked huuuuge!
    And since we only had a 1963 B&W set, the color fringing from the glasses made it a "color" TV!
    I was five at the time, but hey.

    --
    "Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
  127. A legite way to a cheap video projection system by aantix · · Score: 0

    I recently built a projection system using an LCD Panel (manufactured 1995,640x480 16m colors), a used high intensity projector (you at least want to get 4,000 lumens), and a TV tuner card for the computer. All of these products were purchased off of Ebay.

    I have watched DVD's, TV, and played 3d games, and it works flawlessly (other than the fact my bulbs burn out every 50-75 hours)! :-) I get a clear, 5x4 ft projection screen on my wall, all for about the cost of $300.

    --
    "Shake yur bon bon"
  128. Re:Forget lenses, what about scanning LED projecto by X86Daddy · · Score: 1

    I remember this exact concept, but it was applied to microdisplays rather than macrodisplays: Head-mounted displays for wearable computers. You basically described the exact workings of several of the products that the 'borgs at MIT used.

  129. Re:Forget lenses, what about scanning LED projecto by thisisjoex · · Score: 1

    It seems to me that two spinning mirror cylinders set at right angles could scan out a sqare area on the wall much more effectively than jiggling a static mirror all over the place. You could add more sides to the cylinders to reduce the rotational velocity (or to increase the scan rate). Thus you have two parts moving in nice simple to control ways and intertia is working for you (once they've spun up).

    Also, don't forget that led's have capacitance. In order to scan with an ultra-bright led, you need to be able to change it's brightness faster than your scan rate or bright sections will smear into dimmer sections and vice versa, i.e. blur.

  130. I can't believe you people keep falling for this.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    Taco is just too damn inept/lazy to launch a dds on this site.So, he just makes inane posts and links to the sites he doesn't like...Voila! site down. You folks fall for everytime, too.

  131. Re:Forget lenses, what about scanning LED projecto by MavrickA · · Score: 1

    My roommate and I did something similar to this in college, except we used a low-powered laser. Our goal wasn't to make a tv-type display; it was to make something similar the the laser projectors used at laser shows. There were no lenses involved. We bought 2 cheapo 4-watt speakers and ripped the cones out. Then we rubber cemented a mirror from the solanoid to the edge. We then mounted these at 90 degrees to each other and shined the laser so it reflected off both mirrors then hit the projection surface. We hooked the speakers up to an amplified sound card and generated frequencies that painted pictures with the laser. It worked great except we couldn't turn the laser off to make discontinuous objects, frequency response characteristics of the speakers and sound card limited what we could draw, one color, and our 0.5mW laser wasn't bright enough to cover large areas.

  132. Re:Forget lenses, what about scanning LED projecto by Keick · · Score: 1

    Sounds like you want to do something similar to a laser show. See http://www.laser-light-show.com/ for an example. The biggest draw back I can see with doing it with a led is keeping the beam focused over the projection distances you proposed. Now if we had cheap RGB lasers, it would be a fun project.

  133. Subtitles anyone? by dped · · Score: 1

    How am I going to watch "Fist of the Legend" subtitled, when the words are backwards?

  134. Procuring supplies cheaply by Paul+the+Bold · · Score: 1

    If you live near a university, find the place where they surplus old stuff. At my university, University Surplus is part of the Property Control department, is only open one day a week, and hidden in some WWII military barracks on the South side of campus. You may have to look hard to find the one near you. Ask a custodian or somebody who works in a machine shop.

    I go by regularly, and often see projection screens that are cheap. They sometimes have slide and flimstrip projectors. The prices are often lower than those on e-Bay because they are not trying to turn a profit, and you don't have to pay shipping.

    1. Re:Procuring supplies cheaply by nexthec · · Score: 1

      wow, You must go to the University of Idaho, that exactly describes where our surplus is ;->

    2. Re:Procuring supplies cheaply by Paul+the+Bold · · Score: 1

      No, I live nowhere near Idaho. I'll give you a hint: it's to the South and East of Idaho.

  135. My own projection project by Alsee · · Score: 1

    Wow, awesome timing.

    I'm in the middle of a Lunar Projection System(tm) project. I've solved the focus issue - infinity gives pretty accurate results. I've got a couple of ideas on improving the brightness. That just leaves one problem to resolve - can anyone suggest a really cheap solution to delaying the audio stream 2 seconds?

    --
    - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    1. Re:My own projection project by Dax_is_a_geek · · Score: 0

      I would think using a 2 second sound buffer DSP chip would be the easiest.

  136. The origin of the 100" plans? by cr0sh · · Score: 2

    AcidWarp and The Warper

    I am not really sure if this is the earliest incarnation - somehow, I doubt it. But it has to be an early one (1992)...

    --
    Reason is the Path to God - Anon
  137. Two Words by robbway · · Score: 1

    Box Camera.

    This technique does better at reducing an image. It is a novelty, but the "projector" is huge.

  138. Public performance illegal even without DMCA by yerricde · · Score: 2

    by adding a magnifying glass or projector to the screen, you are depriving the copyright owners by reproducing the image on an unlicensed object, such as a wall

    Not as far-fetched as it may seem as first. By modifying your television to have a larger display size, you potentially convert it into a tool for public performance, and even without the Digital Millennium Copyright Act and foreign counterparts, the copyright laws of the United States and most other jurisdictions reserve the right of public performance to the copyright holder.

    --
    Will I retire or break 10K?
  139. Moderate the Editors! by aka-ed · · Score: 0, Troll
    This is the "fresnel lens" dealio? God, Commander Taco, you have been sucked in, just like Timothy was yesterday by the "Stegdetect" guy!

    I don't really think things are so bad that we need to moderate the editors, but just a weensy bit of research can help in these cases. There will always be slips, thank god for the BS detectors of the /. readers!

    --
    I survived the Dick Cheney Presidency 7 to 9 AM 7-21-07
    1. Re:Moderate the Editors! by aka-ed · · Score: 1
      Yeah, like requesting that slashdot's editors research their postings is a troll. What a waste of mod points.

      --
      I survived the Dick Cheney Presidency 7 to 9 AM 7-21-07
  140. Image inversion, and solving edge fuziness... by cr0sh · · Score: 3, Informative

    Image Inversion:

    It is possible to flip the wires around on the deflection coil in your TV or monitor. It is also possible to rotate the deflection coil assembly on some monitors/TVs. Here is a webpage detailing flipping wires.

    BE VERY CAREFUL IF YOU ARE WORKING ON THE INSIDE OF A TV OR MONITOR - THERE ARE LETHAL VOLTAGES PRESENT, EVEN IF THE TV OR MONITOR IS OFF!!! DISCHARGE THE PICTURE TUBE AND ALL CAPACITORS!!! EVEN THEN, BE ULTRA-EXTRA CAREFUL - YOU CAN KILL YOURSELF IF YOU ARE NOT CAREFUL!!! IF YOU HAVE _ANY_ DOUBTS, DON'T FUCK WITH IT!!! I CANNOT STRESS THIS ENOUGH!!! (maybe I should add more exclamation points?)

    I am amazed that the kid (at the link I gave) didn't kill himself.

    Correcting Fuziness:

    Two options - bend the screen horizontally (like the Torus screens in theaters), possibly vertically as well, to bring the edges in focus. Might be difficult to do. Option B (probably more difficult) would be to bend the fresnel lens slightly...

    --
    Reason is the Path to God - Anon
  141. Well, damn. by dschuetz · · Score: 2

    Thanks to the entire slashdot community for dashing my dreams. Now I just have to figure out how to get LEDs for, lessee, a 1920x1080 array, and...umm...HOW MUCH would that cost?

    Seriously, I'm glad I finally got a good rundown on some of the issues here, especially the feasibility of image retention for such a fast scan (doesn't work) and the problem of precision hardware. Someone else mentioned lasers, but even the little laser pointers scare the bejeesus out of me, and I certainly wouldn't advocate making a TV out of 'em.

    *sigh*

    Now, about that array of microscopic thermocouples to use as an air conditioner / power source....

    d.

    (anyone ever think it might be useful to have a "crazy ideas" website to discuss, well, crazy ideas?)

    1. Re:Well, damn. by bko · · Score: 1
  142. Solving edge fuziness - another issue? by cr0sh · · Score: 2

    Something I just thought of:

    Maybe the edges are blurry because most TVs and monitors have curved glass fronts (especially cheap TVs) - perhaps using a WEGA or some other flat tube might help things? I know that the actual image may be "flat" - but there is a lot of glass it still has to pass through, thus possibly distorting it when you magnify it?

    --
    Reason is the Path to God - Anon
  143. Hey Moderator by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Offtopic? I didn't see him talking about shoes or anything else not directly related to the repeated topic.

    I'll meet you in MetaMod.

  144. Actually, they do... by cr0sh · · Score: 2

    Actually, TV's _do_ have pixels (except they aren't called pixels, but instead "dots", hence, "dot-pitch ratio", which gives the distance between adjacent dots).

    Each dot is formed by a thin piece of material called the "electron gun shadow mask", which is basically a very fancy method of saying "a piece of thin metal with lots of precisely placed holes in it". This mask is swept on the back by the electron stream from the "electron gun" in the back (actually, three different "guns" are used, one for each color R, G and B). As the beam passes over the hole, it lights up a corresponding dot of red, green, or blue phospor, which glows in the proper color. This beam is varied in intensity, to change the color level of each dot, to give the wide variety of colors (interesting point - most TVs aren't balanced to pure white, but rather to the blue end of the spectrum, adding blue to a display makes it look brighter to our eyes, but purists have issues with it - also note the same is used in laundry detergent). These dots are very small, and close together, but they exist nonetheless. If this mask wasn't used, extreme smearing would result (now, your statement is correct prior to the mask, but not after it). One other thing, some picture tubes use a grid of vertical wires as a mask - not sure how it works, but I would imagine it is similar, but with less interfereing, and no holes to create pinhole camera electron beam distortion effects, there exists less blurring (ie, the beam doesn't stray from its phospor dot onto adjacent dots). I am sure there is a good FAQ on this out there.

    If you want to "see" these dots, up close, take a magnafying glass and look at your monitor or TV, or, alternatively, get some beads of water on your TV, and you can see them (badly, of course).

    --
    Reason is the Path to God - Anon
  145. Scanning is easy, synch is picky, power is hard. by Christopher+Thomas · · Score: 2

    All that remains is to decode the video signal for processing by the projector. In a simple mode, you might even be able to simply take the HSYNC and VSYNC signals and, essentially, use them to mark the edges of your scanning motion, then simply vibrate the mirror back and forth within that time frame. (this is hard to describe, but hopefully it'll make sense to some of you).

    An easier way to do this is to use two spinning mirrors to do your scanning. The problem with this is that you'd need to buffer and re-send the image data, because your "blanking intervals" will be much larger than your display time under this scheme. If you don't mind hacking CRTC settings and are using a computer instead of a TV, you might be able to get your video card to drive its monitor port with this kind of signal instead (had a lot of fun making video cards do things they were never intended to a couple of years back).

    You'll also need to have the spinning mirrors fairly far from your projection screen or wall to avoid distortion (you're scanning at constant angular frequency, not constant linear speed on the wall). This makes sych problems worse (blanking interval is that much larger, because you're using that much narrower a wedge of the circle the beam is scanned through).

    Electronics to synch the mirror rotation to the synch pulses is easy to build. Use a classical control system with extra damping. $2 worth of electronics to clean up the input signals and $1 worth of electronics to control the speed of the mirror-spinning motors.

    Now, the big problem (as others have pointed out) is that you must deliver enough power to your LEDs to brightly illuminate a large patch of wall (or screen, if you prefer). This means shelling out tens of thousands of dollars for a high-power krypton laser (so you get R/G/B from one laser), some decent optics (gratings to separate out the colours, mirrors, etc), and "three accousto-optic modulators" (devices that modulate a signal on to a laser beam). This will probably be cheaper than your laser, but that's only because the laser is bloody expensive.

    Still a very fun project; just not a cheap one :).

  146. I CAN'T BELIEVE THIS WORKS BUT IT DOES!!!!! by xXgeneric+nicknameXx · · Score: -1

    EARN EXTRA CASH - THIS IS NOT GET-RICH QUICK - BUT WHAT
    WOULD YOU DO WITH $15,000? JUST IMAGINE BY NOV 30, 2001 -
    JUST SIX WEEKS FROM NOW - AND WHAT YOU WOULD DO WITH
    $15,000....

    HI THERE! With a couple of minutes of your time I'm going to show you how you
    can turn $6 and 6 stamps into thousands of dollars. Don't get skeptical yet, just
    read the letter and then decide if you want to invest a lousy $6!! This program is
    working for many others at this very moment and it can also work for you.

    HOW TO TURN SIX DOLLARS INTO SIX THOUSAND: READING THIS
    COULD CHANGE YOUR LIFE! IT DOES WORK!

    I found this on a bulletin board and decided to try it. A little while back, I was
    browsing through newsgroups, just like you are now, and came across an article
    similar to this that said you could make thousands of dollars within weeks with only
    an initial investment of $6.00! So I thought, "Yeah right, this must be a scam", but
    like most of us, I was curious, so I kept reading. Anyway, it said that you send
    $1.00 to each of the 6 names and address stated in the article. You then place your
    own name and address in the bottom of the list at #6, and post the article in at least
    200 newsgroups. (There are thousands) No catch, that was it.

    Here's one example from a successful moneymaker: Mike writes "what have I got
    to lose except 6 stamps and $6.00, right?" Then I invested the measly $6.00. Well
    GUESS WHAT!?... within 7 days, I started getting money in the mail! I was
    shocked! I figured it would end soon, but the money just kept coming in. In my first
    week, I made about $25.00. By the end of the second week I had made a total of
    over $1,000.00! In the third week I had over $10,000.00 and it's still growing. This
    is now my fourth week and I have made a total of just over $42,000.00 and it's still
    coming in rapidly. It's certainly worth $6.00, and 6 stamps, Let me tell you how this
    works and most importantly, WHY it works... Also, make sure you print a copy of
    this article NOW, so you can get the information off of it as you need it. I promise
    you that if you follow the directions exactly, that you will start making more money
    than you thought possible by doing something so easy!

    Suggestion: Read this entire message carefully! (print it out or download it.) Follow
    the simple directions and watch the money come in! It's easy. It's legal. And, your
    investment is only $6.00 (Plus postage)

    IMPORTANT: This is not a rip-off; it is not indecent; it is not illegal; and it is 99%
    no risk - it really works! If all of the following instructions are adhered to, you will
    receive extraordinary dividends.

    PLEASE NOTE: Please follow these directions EXACTLY, and $50,000 or more
    can be yours in 20 to 60 days. This program remains successful because of the
    honesty and integrity of the participants. Please continue its success by carefully
    adhering to the instructions. You will now become part of the Mail Order business.
    In this business your product is not solid and tangible, it's a service. You are in the
    business of developing Mailing Lists. Many large corporations are happy to pay big
    bucks for quality lists. However, the money made from the mailing lists is
    secondary to the income which is made from people like you and me asking to be
    included in that list.

    Here are the 4 easy steps to success: STEP 1: Get 6 separate pieces of paper and
    write the following on each piece of paper "PLEASE PUT ME ON YOUR
    MAILING LIST." Now get 6 US $1.00 bills and place ONE inside EACH of the 6
    pieces of paper so the bill will not be seen through the envelope (to prevent
    thievery). Next, place one paper in each of the 6 envelopes and seal them. You
    should now have 6 sealed envelopes, each with a piece of paper stating the above
    phrase, your name and address, and a $1.00 bill. What you are doing is creating a
    service. THIS IS ABSOLUTELY LEGAL! You are requesting a legitimate
    service and you are paying for it! Like most of us I was a little skeptical and a little
    worried about the legal aspects of it all. So I checked it out with the U.S. Post
    Office (1-800-725-2161) and they confirmed that it is indeed legal. Mail the 6
    envelopes to the following addresses:

    #1) Dennis E. Ribble
    RR3 Box 32-1B
    Benton, PA 17814
    #2) Tim Baldwin
    RR3 Box 304
    Inwood, WV 25428
    #3)Michael Patrickson
    58-12 218st
    Bayside, N.Y 11364
    #4)Scott Williams
    4930 South 98th St.
    Omaha, NE 68127
    #5)Jake Tobin
    240 S. Eaton St.
    Lakewood, CO 80226
    #6)xXgeneric nicknameXx
    2608 Clubhouse Rd.
    Mobile, AL 36605

    STEP 2: Now take the #1 name off the list that you see above, move the other
    names up (6 becomes 5, 5 becomes 4, etc...) and add YOUR Name as number 6
    on the list. STEP 3: Change anything you need to, but try to keep this article as
    close to original as possible. Now, post your amended article to at least 200
    newsgroups. (I think there are close to 24,000 groups) All you need is 200, but
    remember, the more you post, the more money you make! You won't get very
    much unless you post like crazy. :) This is perfectly legal! If you have any doubts,
    refer to Title 18 Sec. 1302 & 1341 of the Postal lottery laws.

    Keep a copy of these steps for yourself and, whenever you need money, you can
    use it again, and again.

    PLEASE REMEMBER that this program remains successful because of the
    honesty and integrity of the participants and by their carefully adhering to the
    directions. Look at it this way. If you are of integrity, the program will continue and
    the money that so many others have received will come your way.

    NOTE: You may want to retain every name and address sent to you, either on a
    computer or hard copy and keep the notes people send you. This VERIFIES that
    you are truly providing a service. (Also, it might be a good idea to wrap the $1 bill
    in dark paper to reduce the risk of mail theft.)

    So, as each post is downloaded and the directions carefully followed, six members
    will be reimbursed for their participation as a List Developer with one dollar each.
    Your name will move up the list geometrically so that when your name reaches the
    #1 position you will be receiving thousands of dollars in CASH!!! What an
    opportunity for only $6.00 ($1.00 for each of the first six people listed above) Send
    it now, add your own name to the list and you're in business!

    ---DIRECTIONS --- FOR HOW TO POST TO NEWSGROUPS--- Step 1) You
    do not need to re-type this entire letter to do your own posting. Simply put your
    cursor at the beginning of this letter and drag your cursor to the bottom of this
    document, and select 'copy' from the edit menu. This will copy the entire letter into
    the computer's memory. Step 2) Open a blank 'notepad' file and place your cursor
    at the top of the blank page. From the 'edit' menu select 'paste'. This will paste a
    copy of the letter into notepad so that you can add your name to the list. Step 3)
    Save your new notepad file as a .txt file. If you want to do your postings in
    different settings, you'll always have this file to go back to. Step 4) Use Netscape
    or Internet explorer and try searching for various newsgroups (on-line forums,
    message boards, chat sites, discussions.) Step 5) Visit these message boards and
    post this article as a new message by highlighting the text of this letter and
    selecting paste from the edit menu. Fill in the Subject, this will be the header that
    everyone sees as they scroll through the list of postings in a particular group, click
    the post message button. You're done with your first one!
    Congratulations...THAT'S IT! All you have to do is jump to different newsgroups
    and post away, after you get the hang of it, it will take about 30 seconds for each
    newsgroup!

    **REMEMBER, THE MORE NEWSGROUPS YOU POST IN, THE MORE
    MONEY YOU WILL MAKE! BUT YOU HAVE TO POST A MINIMUM OF
    200** That's it! You will begin receiving money from around the world within
    days! You may eventually want to rent a P.O.Box due to the large amount of mail
    you will receive. If you wish to stay anonymous, you can invent a name to use, as
    long as the postman will deliver it. **JUST MAKE SURE ALL THE
    ADDRESSES ARE CORRECT.**

    Each of the 5 persons who just sent me $1.00 make the MINIMUM 200 postings,
    each with my name at #5 and only 5 persons respond to each of the original 5, that
    is another $25.00 for me, now those 25 each make 200 MINIMUM posts with my
    name at #4 and only 5 replies each, I will bring in an additional $125.00! Now,
    those 125 persons turn around and post the MINIMUM 200 with my name at #3
    and only receive 5 replies each, I will make an additional $625.00! OK, now here is
    the fun part, each of those 625 persons post a MINIMUM 200 letters with my
    name at #2 and they each only receive 5 replies, that just made me $3,125.00!!!
    Those 3,125 persons will all deliver this message to 200 newsgroups with my name
    at #1 and if still 5 persons per 200 newsgroups react I will receive $15,625,00!
    With an original investment of only $6.00! AMAZING! When your name is no
    longer on the list, you just take the latest posting in the newsgroups, and send out
    another $6.00 to names on the list, putting your name at number 6 again. And start
    posting again. The thing to remember is: do you realize that thousands of people all
    over the world are joining the internet and reading these articles everyday, JUST
    LIKE YOU are now!! So, can you afford $6.00 and see if it really works?? I think
    so... People have said, "what if the plan is played out and no one sends you the
    money? So what! What are the chances of that happening when there are tons of
    new honest users and new honest people who are joining the internet and
    newsgroups everyday and are willing to give it a try? Estimates are at 20,000 to
    50,000 new users, every day, with thousands of those joining the actual internet.
    Remember, play FAIRLY and HONESTLY and this will really work.

    --

    My cat's breath smells like cat food.--R. Wiggums

  147. Re:Forget lenses, what about scanning LED projecto by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The scanning would have to be very fast.

    CRT screens have colored phosphors on the inside of the screen that glow after being hit for an instant with a stream of electrons. The phosphors have a characteristic 'persistance' which is how long they continue to glow after being stimulated by the electron beam. However, your wall (or bedsheet or projector screen) has no persistance, so you would have to scan your beam across the wall somewhat faster than the electron beam gets scanned across the TV screen, or the image would flicker.

    We know from motion pictures that the human brain can be fooled into seeing uninterrupted motion if a picture is cycled in front of us at 24 frames per second, but I don't know what the duty cycle is. There is an interesting paper by Charles Poynton at http://www.inforamp.net/~poynton/papers/Motion_por trayal/ that suggests doubling the 24 fps by simply displaying the same image twice in a row would get rid of most of the flickering.

    Of course the easy solution would just be to use one red, one green, and one blue LED, each focused into a beam, and use portable gravity generators just in front of the beam source to sweep the beam across the wall!

    Chris Owens
    Santa Clara, CA
    factotum@pair.com

  148. The Warper? by atporter · · Score: 1

    It's ammusing that this is still floating around the net. First time I remember seeing it was back on my 286 when I downloaded AcidWarp. Sure enough, the docs are still on Noah's site.
    http://www.noah.org/acidwarp/warper.html

  149. Re:Forget lenses, what about scanning LED projecto by logophage · · Score: 1

    actually, laser printers work much the same way. the paper rolls across a drum while a laser horizontally scans across the page. the laser bounces off a rotating mirror (called a roof mirror); this mirror is typically hexagonal- or octagonal-shaped.

    it seems to me that you could do the same sort of scanning setup with a laser/lasers. (1) mount the laser(s) on a rotating drum like a VCR head. the VCR head has the additional plus of being a rotating transformer so you could get power to the laser(s). (2) rotate a roof mirror perpendicular to the rotation of the laser(s). this would produce a helically scanned image which would have to be rectified through a cylindrical lens of some sort. maybe you could curve a frensel lens to the correct radius of curvature. anyway just an idea.

  150. Re:Forget lenses, what about scanning LED projecto by Fnord · · Score: 1

    What about instead of vibrating a mirror (which would as you said cause compression waves in the air and send pretty substantial vibrations through the machine (which could then travel to the leds throwing their focus off, but I digress). Why not have a box with mirrors on the outside and rotate it . Because you'd have four mirrors you'd only have to rotate it at 7.5 rps, you'd counteract any vibrations (assuming you balance the box right) and you'd get a smoother motion to boot (no slow down at the extremeties of the pictures, its hard to vibrate something in a manner thats not sinusoidal (though sinusoidal motion in that mirror could be counteracted by a cylindrical mirror afterwards but again I digress)).
    The problem with using a row of 640 leds is that you once again have the fixed resolution problem (at least horizontally). I don't know if it would be feasable to rotate a miror box at 3925 rps (to do the horizontal scan with one led) but it would solve that problem.

  151. Re:you know what 640x480 on a 21" monitor looks li by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    >Now take that and multiply it times your worst possible dream to get pixels the size of green peas across the wall in your 100" display

    YOU MIGHT NOT LIKE THAT, but for me, it's the only way to actually see my dick with a webcam :)

  152. Re:Forget lenses, what about scanning LED projecto by tcc · · Score: 2

    Not enough millicandella (or candela) output, I'd suggest R G and B lasers to do it, but that would be cost prohibitive... but REALLY bright and nice color balancing.

    --
    --- Metamoderating abusive downgraders since my 300th post.
  153. LCD Projector methods by lute3 · · Score: 1
    It looks like several DIY home audio/theater people out there have made home projection systems. The standard source of video appears to be the Sharp 8.4-inch LCD. That will run you ~$300. I did a search on Google for 'LCD 8.4' and had some pretty good luck.

    Afraid the Fresnel lens will degrade the quality of the image from your expensive LCD? Try this Bausch & Lomb lens--it appears to be a non-Fresnel, so it doesn't have the lines that could cause some quality loss. You could end up creating a better quality product than a $4000 LCD if this lens works the way I think it does.

    Some video source thoughts:
    -- 7-inch 16:9 LCD (I don't know where the 7 inches are--I think they're horizontal) being offered to Playstation/PSX owners
    -- good source of variety of LCDs?
    -- there are several 5-inch TFT NTSC LCDs available for use with the Playstation/PSX (some better than others)

    If I weren't able to get good resolution out of the 16:9 version, I'd rather use a VGA LCD at ~$260-350 any day with the NTSC LCD prices Best Buy and Radio Shack charge.

    Final thoughts on the dimness issue.. With an LCD, you should be able to remove the reflective backing (ever so carefully, pack a UV-protectant clear sheet of plastic over the back of the device and pump some flourescent, arc, or other bright lighting through it.
    Some problems foreseen:
    -- may take some experimentation to find the light that irritates the eyes the least
    -- may need two settings for day and night
    -- be very cautious as not to create a fire hazard

  154. Re:Forget lenses, what about scanning LED projecto by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't think so....

    If you have 3 LED's, RGB, and you want to use a moving mirror to project their light, you suddenly have two big problems:

    1. At 640x480, each pixel will be 1/307200 of the brightness of the non-moving LED. In other words, imagine how those little LED's would look spread over such a large surface area.

    2. You have mechanical problems. Let's assume that you use rotating mirror assemblies on an equalateral triangle configuration so that one revolution of the motor = 3 scans across the surface. The vertical scanning mirror will need to spin at 20Hz. Not too bad. The horizonal scanning mirror will need to spin at 9,600Hz (480 scanlines x 60 frames / 3 for our mirror config). Trust me when I tell you that you can't buy normal motors that move that fast without it being sealed and within a closed and tightly controlled environment (think : inside of a harddrive)

    Now, you can make the arguement "Well! Let's use a row of these LED's to act as a single scan line and we can fix both of those problems." Well, not so fast, sparky. Your $6 in LEDS just became at least $3000 in LEDS and you've created an ENORMOUS amount of mechanical, heat, and electrical problems for yourself. Can you even comprehend how much power 1500 LED's (480x3) would take?!?!? It would be enormous.

    If you did some research you'd find that mechanical scanning displays have been around since at least as long as electron gun CRT's, but the mechanical problems were either never solved or never solved well enough to make an actual, practical display from.

    I admire the cognitive inventiveness, as it kept me awake one night, too. But after some rational consideration of the real problems that it'd create (instead of just asking for help from "EE's"...shame on you! Where's that DIY hacker ethic?) I realized that mentally I was barking up the wrong tree and got back to work fixing my broken CRT projector.

  155. Brightness is a big issue by catseye_95051 · · Score: 2

    I built soemthign like this in college out of a big old black and white set and a lense from a Xerox machine.

    The problem was brightness, it was basicly unviewable except in pitch black. You can up the brightenss by putting a tube transformer in the set but it reduces your picture tube life. (You can also up the brightness by getting a scotchlite screen, but they are serious bucks.)

  156. Here is a good link for the instructions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    This one even has diagrams and all.

    http://broch.subnet.dk/projector/start.htm

  157. Overhead Project by Watto · · Score: 1

    Guys, Why not just buy a overhead project and put your TV in where the globe normally goes? Wouldn't that work? Then you'd have focus ability. Cheers Watto

    --
    -------------------------------------------------- --- Smith & Wesson : The original point &
  158. Reminds me of a song... by Clubber+Lang · · Score: 1

    I mean sure, 100" sounds impressive... but really, it can't compete with Frank's 2000" TV!

    --
    Actuaries - making accountants look interesting since 1949
  159. Decontaminating Anthrax by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    I hear that if your a smoker that the coal tar kills anthrax. How many packs a day do you have to smoke to be completely immune?

    I hear sunlight pasteurizes that shit to. How long do you have to leave spores in sunlight to kill them?

    Anthrax spores have an unusual characteristic in that it has a flat end on the rod that a standard optical analyiser ought to easily be programmed to detect.

    The danger seems to be that spores can't be digested by macrophages so they choke up the body. Couldn't Hyperbaric Oxygenation force the spores into active mode whereupon the macrophges' digestive processses might be effective

    I think anyone who can't understand why Americans are so upset by 9 1 1 , ought immediately be hospitalized indefinitely, if the loss of six thousand college educated, civilized human beings doesn't impress them, treatment for psychosis ought to begin promptly. How many times must we allow witless savages to repeat this, for no other reason but bragging rights.

  160. Re:Reason for lack of brightness by Technician · · Score: 5, Interesting
    For anybody who wants to know why they are so dim..

    A CRT projector of the 3 tube variety uses this setup for several reasons related to brightness. Number one on the list is no slot mask! Each tube is one color. You are not blocking 80% of the electron beam to the phosphor with a matrix shadow mask inside the CRT.

    Number 2 on the list is F stop. A large CRT giving off light with a lens far away gets very little light to and thru the lens. Most (about 80% or more) of the light hits the inside of the box instead of the lens. A projector set uses a small set of CRT's so the lens is very close to the CRT getting most of the light thru the lens. The smaller CRT's can easly have flat faces taking care of the focal plane problem also.

    Raw Power.. The small CRT's in a projection set are not limited in beam current as there is no shadow mask to worry about overheating. The face of the CRT is gel or liquid coupled to the lense to reduce interelement reflections and aid in cooling. They can put out brightnesses on the face of the CRT's that can be painful to look at unlike a conventional tube.

    The last item is when the distance to a projection surface doubles, the brightness goes down with the square of the distance. Doubling the distance to double the size decreases the brightness 4 fold. This is true for both a real projector and the home made variety, but the home made doesn't have the brightness to sacrifice on the larger immage.

    With all these factors working for a 3 tube projector and against a single tube, the diffrence in projected brightness is typicaly more than 200X brighter. Translation.. a room with a couple candles in it will typicaly wash out the image on the home made projectors.

    --
    The truth shall set you free!
  161. I Remember This From When I Used MS-DOS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I seem to remember an old DOS eyecandy program called "Acidwarp" and i remember there used to be
    a commandline switch that printed a small instruction sheet for doing this with a computer screen.
    i thought the idea was pretty cool for projecting
    CG onto walls at parties.

  162. Overhead Projector? by MeltyMan · · Score: 1

    Please forgive me if this has already been mentioned, but what about using overhead projector optics with a regular tv? Reasonably self-contained optics, has the focusing hardware, and if you're lucky, you might get one of those fancy roll-around carts that conjures up images of elementary school hallways... :)

    --
    "Ummmm..." ...The programmer's "Om."
  163. The real reason the color distorts... by Technician · · Score: 2

    It is related to gravity.. The picture tube has a shadow mask. It is thin. It sags slightly (affected by gravity). It is true the beam is affected by the earth's magnetic field, but distortions to the shadow mask are a bigger influence. Try this at home... turn a large TV around and notice the color shift. This color shift is due to reversing the earth's magnetic field 180 degrees. Now lay the set on it's side or upside down. This color shift is due to both gravity and magnetic field. Notice how much greater this shift is. Only a small portion of the shift is due to the earth's magnetic field. The magnetic field was most noticable on large computer monitors that has a fine dot pitch as the small shift could more easly misallign the beam to the phosphor. Most TV's have large pitch so the magnetic field has a smaller effect on color purity.

    --
    The truth shall set you free!
  164. A small correction from the industry... by Technician · · Score: 2

    Colored filters? Never seen one. If you buy a set of projector CRT's (visit a repair shop and ask to see a set of used ones) it is about impossible to tell the colors apart. They all have a yellow whitish phosphor and no filter. To keep from blocking the light produced, they use a phosphor that only produces the color of light needed. No filter = no blocked light = brighter image. If you don't have access to a projector tube set, use a good magnifing glass and look at the screen of your TV when it is off. Can you tell the difference between the red, green and blue phosphors? I can't.

    --
    The truth shall set you free!
  165. Can't believe they still are peddling these by Dolphinzilla · · Score: 1

    I built a projection TV lens system over 20 years ago with a $10 plastic fresnel lense - it worked (in a very dark room) and I also had to re-wire the deflection yoke on the TV to invert and rotate the image (reference optics 101). It was an interesting experience for a 13 year old ( I still can't believe my mother let me tear apart the TV to do the deflection yoke mod ).

    Anyway it sucked 20 years ago and it still would suck today I'm sure....

  166. Finally! by CompuBOb · · Score: 1

    I was actoually about to buy one of these things off ebay after I found that it was impossible to find the instructions off the internet somewhere. Good job people!

    --
    Daddy would you like some sausage?
  167. Re:Screw television. A 100 inch Freznel = Anarchy! by almightyjustin · · Score: 1

    Now there's an idea! If you wanted to set something on fire without being caught, all you'd have to do is set the lens up someplace (on top of a car sunroof is good) and leave! Plus, you can blind people with the intense sunlight as an extra bonus! I wonder if you could use this in conjunction with some swivel-mounted computer-controlled mirrors to mount a death ray above your doorstep? >:D

    --

    Omnes arx vestrum sunt adiuncta nobis.

  168. 15 year's old or more idea. by nexusone · · Score: 1

    Who has not as a kid played with lenses, I got my first fresnel lenses from a surplus supply house.
    Other then burning leaves and ant's, I found that I could project my B&W TV against the wall.
    I have seen other TV to big screen converts, using an old copier lenese....

    Having to have a total dark room to use the 100" screen device is not a big deal.
    I also have played with the real deal, even the high end units look best in a dark room.

    --
    Wise men speak because they have something to say, Fools because they have to say something!!!!
  169. Oh, come on by Animats · · Score: 2
    This idea has been around for years. You get a big, dim, badly focused image. Big deal.

    One warning: I've seen plans for doing this that involve using a much higher second anode voltage on a standard CRT, to get an unusually bright image. This can push the CRT over the threshold where it starts emitting X-rays. Bad idea.

  170. And, oh, don't electrocute yourself by sethdelackner · · Score: 1

    Everything I've read about modifying the insides of TVs says even days after power is removed they can store a huge amount of charge. Be careful!

    Anyone with more solid info care to comment?

    1. Re:And, oh, don't electrocute yourself by Technician · · Score: 2
      Anybody that uses a meter should be aware of that. To make it simple, on most TV's the yoke unplugs. Anyone not knowing where the yoke is, or what it is should not attempt this. Most of the HV stuff is on the second anode. It is supposed to bleed off (by a resistor) but don't trust it. It does fail once in a while. The regular B+ usualy disapates quite quickly unless the set is broken.

      Warning! A set that does not come on is the set most likely to have stored power as the set is not drawing it from the power supply. Do not assume a dead set has no power. Check it with a meter and discharge the capacitors.

      For those who care, I am ISCET certified. (International Society of Certified Electronics Technicians)

      --
      The truth shall set you free!
  171. Even more background .... by taniwha · · Score: 1
    Here's a technical page on the cages and other stuff required to turn a 'Northern Hemisphere" tube into a "Southern Hemisphere" one.



    And
    here's a FAQ explaining why Northern hemisphere monitors don't work so well in the South ....

  172. Uhhhhhh..... by Talkischeap · · Score: 1


    I hope you'll use a condom while your fucking all those people, cause I sure wouldn't want you to breed...

    --
    If it don't GO... chrome it. ~ Frank Banks
  173. Mirror image by pfaustino · · Score: 1

    Is it just me or does this 100" TV project a mirror image ie words are spelled backwards?

  174. Heat by EnglishTim · · Score: 2

    You can do this sort of thing - a friend of mine took the guts from a portable TV and put it in an old slide projector - viola! Projection TV. It worked really well... for about a minute. Unfortunately many LCDs degrade when they get hot. However, solve the cooling problem, and you're golden!

    He used to have a .mpg of how to put one together, but I can't find the URL any more... :(

    1. Re:Heat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      use and LED instead of a bulb for the light source on the projector...

  175. Why no cheap low-res LCD projectors? by AYeomans · · Score: 1

    I've been wondering why no-one seems to make any VGA (640x480) resolution projectors any more? If they were available at half the price of the current XGA projectors, they would make a nice projection TV system.

    --
    Andrew Yeomans
  176. Save Money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Believe that and you'll believe that you can use a pinhole instead of a lense.

  177. Re:Forget lenses, what about scanning LED projecto by smoyer · · Score: 1
    Cool idea! How do we create the vertical scanning rate of 60Hz. I suppose the beam could be sent across another mirror (either vibrating of rotating that provides that proper refresh rate for the vertical retrace.

    This still leaves us with the problem of getting enough optical power (light) onto the mirrors from a single set of LEDs. Lasers (contrary to the hilarious post made earlier) would produce alot of light and shouldn't cause "burn-in" unless the mirrors failed.

    So far, I'd say that the rotating mirror, combined with a row of LEDs would be the best combination.

  178. Re:Forget lenses, what about scanning LED projecto by TheLoneCabbage · · Score: 1

    They do this for laser light shows.

    Uh... expensive does not even begin to describe this set up.

    The scanning mirrors have to be ultralight, and verry refined (may be able to skip this since your not using such a pure beam). Then the motors to drive them are EXPENSIVE and FINICKY!!

    Now that being said, the best scan rate anyone has ever managed with lasers was about 64 lines (Don't hold me to that, it's been a while), and the control board capable of this is only manufactured by one company, in Orlando (whom I used to work for). Top notch equipment if you can afford it. And even they can't do a video projection for TV yet. (www.pangolin.com)

    Moving parts suck.

  179. Try it. Building stuff is fun... by liquidbrains · · Score: 1
    Remeber what it was like to be a kid. Building stuff is fun!

    One sure way to know if it works - try it.

    I built one yesterday evening, after reading Slashdot, using plans I found free on the web.

    I bought a sheet magnifier at Staples for $5.50 and spent about one hour with duct tape, a swiss army knife, two medium u-haul boxes and a 19" color television. I used a mirror to project it onto the ceiling and correct the image backwardness.

    It does not work great, but it does work - and it was a fun excercise.

    I think I'll watch Enterprise on the ceiling tonight!

  180. I tried THIS 19 years ago by vortexau · · Score: 1

    with a 13" CTV, a cardboard lightbaffle, and a lens from an Opaque Projector!

    Of course, without a correcting inverter-lens, all I got was a dim gigantic upsidedown image on the wall and ceiling!

    And I got tied of holding the Lens Barrel and the the cardoard!

    Regards,
    JK

    --
    (David Bowman, EVA near HUGE Monolithic Win-PC in orbit around Jupiter) "My God - its full of Malware!"
  181. Re:Screw television. A 100 inch Freznel = Anarchy! by Tetsujin28 · · Score: 2

    Cool murder mystery from Analog science fiction magazine, some 20 years ago: Revenge-seeker kills his target by carefully pivoting the computer-controlled climate-regulating windows of the office building across from the target's apartment, turning the building into a giant parabolic sun-miror.

    --
    - - - -
    The real Tetsujin 28 is a giant robot.
  182. Re:you know what 640x480 on a 21" monitor looks li by drinkypoo · · Score: 1
    Now take that and multiply it times your worst possible dream to get pixels the size of green peas across the wall in your 100" display

    YOU MIGHT NOT LIKE THAT, but for me, it's the only way to actually see my dick with a webcam :)

    Yeah, but it only shows up as a couple of peas and a pod...

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"