How about: take 4kg of ice cubes and drop them on your head from 10 feet. Then do the same with a 4kg block of solid ice.
I sounds like what you need for your org. is regular social networking, rather than advertising. I don't usually reshare things, but if one of my friends was asking for singers I would probably pass it on, even if I wasn't interested myself.
I wish I could mod this up. You sum up the privacy problem very concisely, and IMO it renders the security discussion moot.
It's not 'biplanar', it's stereoscopic. I suppose they could use something like what you describe to reconstruct a stereoscopic view of a 2d film, but in practice they are more sophisticated than that. I know you're trying to simplify things, but calling it biplanar is selling it way short.
Don't get me wrong, I hate just about everything about this 3D fad, I just think you are confused about the implementation.
I agree with you about the judge, but that doesn't mean Sony did the "proper thing". I think we can safely blame both of them.
Either way, only half the light (minus absorption, plus leakage) is reaching each eye. Whether it's shuttered or polarised, it's going to be half as bright as showing the same image for both eyes and taking off the glasses.
Just about every computer on the market today runs Unix, except the Mac (and nobody cares about it). -- Bill Joy 6/21/85