How does CNN’s hologram effect work?

By Chris Higgins
From MentalFloss.com…

Last night, CNN debuted its latest ultra-high-tech gizmo: a “hologram” interview system that allows Star Wars-like images of distant people to appear on stage, interacting with the CNN host. Now, it turns out that the “hologram” isn’t actually visible to the host (it’s composited into the image you see at home by a computer), but it’s still pretty neat. Here’s a video of Will.i.am appearing “live via hologram” in the system’s first use:

Okay, so how does this work? Gizmodo tells all. From the Gizmodo article:

On the subject’s side:

• 35 HD cameras pointed at the subject in a ring
• Different cameras shoot at different angles (like the matrix), to transmit the entire body image
• The cameras are hooked up to the cameras in home base in NY, synchronizing the angles so perspective is right
• The system is set up in trailers outside Obama and McCain HQ
• Not only is it mechanical tracking via camera communication, there’s infrared as well
• Correspondents see a 37-inch plasma where the return feed of the combined images are fed back to them. Useful for a misplaced hair or an unseemly boogar
• Twenty “computers” are crunching this data in order to make it usable

Help us, Will.i.am, you’re our only hope!

VIDEO: First look at Tom Hanks in Dan Brown’s “Angels & Demons”

Vodpod videos no longer available.

So what’s Obama going to do with all his leftover campaign money?

From CNN Political Research Director Robert Yoon

(CNN) – So you’ve just finished a hard-fought campaign for federal office, and after paying off campaign expenses and debts, you find yourself with a tidy surplus of funds left over in your campaign coffers. What’s a candidate to do?

The campaign may be over, but there are strict federal guidelines on how unspent campaign funds may be used after the polls have closed and all the votes have been counted. Win or lose, candidates have a number of options available to them on how to dispose of any remaining funds in their campaign kitties, but not surprisingly, “personal use” is not one of the options.

Candidates with leftover funds may do any or all of the following:

· return the money back to the contributors;

· donate an unlimited amount to charity;

· donate an unlimited amount to a national, state, or local political party committee;

· contribute money to other candidates, subject to allowable federal contribution limits;

· convert their campaign committee into a political action committee;

· transfer the money to a future federal campaign account.

Therefore, if President-elect Barack Obama finds himself with a surplus of cash from his 2008 presidential campaign account, he could essentially use that money for a future federal campaign, say, a 2012 re-election bid.

The rules are slightly different for Republican nominee John McCain because he acceped public funding during the general election. McCain may exercise any of the above options when it comes to leftover funds from his primary or pre-convention campaign account. But any surplus funds from the taxpayer-financed $84.1 million he received after accepting the GOP nomination must be returned to the U.S. Treasury.

However, this may all be a moot point if both candidates spent most or all of their campaign warchests. Exactly how much money Obama and McCain have left in their accounts won’t be known until December 4 when the next file campaign finance reports with the Federal Election Commission.

Historic for all the right reasons

A letter from Governor David Paterson (D-NY):

I suspect that by the time that you’re reading this, you’ve heard the word historic used more times than you can count.

I’d like to use it once more, but perhaps not for the reason that you might think.

The election of Barack Obama as our 44th president was not just historic for reasons of race, voter turnout, or even for the overwhelming and indisputable rejection of a conservative ideology that for eight long years has led America down a path of fiscal recklessness, social division, and increasing instability both at home and abroad.

The election was, of course, all of those things; but, to me, Barack Obama’s win was historic for an entirely different reason.

Last night, Americans rejected the politics of cheap rhetoric, distracting attacks, and exclusionary patriotism in favor of honest discussion, clear priorities, and a dedication to finding real solutions.

That is truly historic.

For the first time in a long time, I believe that America has a president who is ready to confront the difficult challenges before us in a way that is serious, responsible, and dignified.

For the first time in a long time, I believe that America has a president who will focus on the real issues, discuss real solutions, and make a real impact for families across this country.

For the first time in a long time, I believe that America has a president who is ready for an honest dialogue about the problems that we face and who will level with the American people about what needs to be done to address them.

And for the first time in a long time, I believe that America has a president who acknowledges that there are no easy answers to the challenges of the 21st Century, but that answers do exist when we are willing to work together to find them.

The election of Barack Obama and Joe Biden, as well as the Democrat take-over of the New York State Senate, provides a historic opportunity to begin a new chapter in American governance; a chapter where solutions matter more than who gets the credit, where results matter more than just winning re-election, and where the truth matters more than political pandering.

I am, by nature, an optimist who believes that our best days are ahead of us. I believe that despite our current obstacles we will see the glory of the Empire State restored.

But these serious issues require serious and responsible governance. For the first time in a long time, I believe that we have a partner in the White House who is ready to meet these challenges.

Historic, indeed.

Governor David A. Paterson

Newsweek: Behind the scenes of the 2008 presidential campaigns

All of this is from an upcoming special edition report by Newsweek magazine that was produced by a bunch of reporters with the understanding that none of it would be published until AFTER election day. There’s some really interesting tidbits in it, check it out…

From HuffingtonPost.com…

— McCain himself rarely spoke to Palin during the campaign and aides kept him in the dark about the details of her spending on clothes because they were sure he would be offended. Palin asked to speak along with McCain at his Arizona concession speech but campaign strategist Steve Schmidt vetoed the request.

— The Obama campaign was provided with reports from the Secret Service showing a sharp and very disturbing increase in threats to Obama in September and early October, at the same time that the crowds at Palin rallies became more frenzied. Michelle Obama was shaken by the vituperative crowds and the hot rhetoric from the GOP candidates. “Why would they try to make people hate us?” Michelle Obama said to a top campaign aide.

— On the Sunday night before the last debate, McCain’s core group of advisers–Steve Schmidt, Rick Davis, adman Fred Davis, strategist Greg Strimple, pollster Bill McInturff and strategy director Sarah Simmons — met to decide whether or not to tell McCain that the race was effectively over, that he no longer had a chance to win. The consensus in the room was no, not yet, not while he still had “a pulse.”

— The Obama campaign’s “New Media” experts created a computer program that would allow a “flusher”–the term for a volunteer who rounds up nonvoters on Election Day–to know exactly who had, and had not, voted in real time. They dubbed it Project Houdini, because of the way names disappear off the list instantly once people are identified as they wait in line at their local polling station.

— Palin launched her attack on Obama’s association with William Ayers, the former Weather Underground bomber, before the campaign had finalized a plan to raise the issue. McCain’s advisers were working on a strategy that they hoped to unveil the following week, but McCain had not signed off on it, and top adviser Mark Salter was resisting.

— McCain also was reluctant to use Obama’s incendiary pastor Rev. Jeremiah Wright as a campaign issue. He had set firm boundaries: no Jeremiah Wright; no attacking Michelle Obama; no attacking Obama for not serving in the military. McCain balked at an ad using images of children that suggested that Obama might not protect them from terrorism; Schmidt vetoed ads suggesting that Obama was soft on crime (no Willie Hortons); and before word even got to McCain, Schmidt and Salter scuttled a “celebrity” ad of Obama dancing with talk-show host Ellen DeGeneres (the sight of a black man dancing with a lesbian was deemed too provocative).

— Obama was never inclined to choose Sen. Hillary Clinton as his running mate, not so much because she had been his sometime bitter rival on the campaign trail, but because of her husband. Still, as Hillary’s name came up in veep discussions, and Obama’s advisers gave all the reasons why she should be kept off the ticket, Obama would stop and ask, “Are we sure?” He needed to be convinced one more time that the Clintons would do more harm than good. McCain, on the other hand, was relieved to face Biden as the veep choice, and not Hillary Clinton, whom the McCain camp had truly feared.

— McCain was dumbfounded when Congressman John Lewis, a civil-rights hero, issued a press release comparing McCain with former Alabama Gov. George Wallace, a segregationist infamous for stirring racial fears. McCain had devoted a chapter to Lewis in one of his books, “Why Courage Matters” and had so admired Lewis that he had once taken his children to meet him.

— The debates unnerved both candidates. When he was preparing for the Democratic primary debates, Obama was recorded saying, “I don’t consider this to be a good format for me, which makes me more cautious. I often find myself trapped by the questions and thinking to myself, ‘You know, this is a stupid question, but let me … answer it.’ So when Brian Williams is asking me about what’s a personal thing that you’ve done [that’s green], and I say, you know, ‘Well, I planted a bunch of trees.’ And he says, ‘I’m talking about personal.’ What I’m thinking in my head is, ‘Well, the truth is, Brian, we can’t solve global warming because I f—ing changed light bulbs in my house. It’s because of something collective’.”

I love my Ethics class

A Change is Gonna Come

Sam Cooke – A Change is Gonna Come

A Moment for History