gofsckyourself

Look, it was not a perfect analogy. There's no need to be nitpicky and only focus on the fact the analogy is not perfect. I was grasping at straws to try to convey a difficult concept while I felt people were attacking me.

Actually, you've pretty much nailed what I've been trying to say.

That's a good way of rephrasing my point. Calling it "black and white" is an analogy and not explicitly what they see. While we don't know how the brain interprets vision without comes from our perspective ("is my blue your blue?"), it's not "black and white" in the way we know it.

The title just states it as if they explicitly see only "black and white" and I was just trying to point out the difference. It spreads bad information phrased like that.

That can happen if the device is installed in a less-than-ideal location. UV, dust, debris, etc can affect the lifespan of the detector.

That's exactly what The Bomb wants us to think. Don't listen to this bomb lover's propaganda!

That would highly depend on the particular device and battery used. Electronics are designed to work within a voltage range because voltage often fluctuates, with both AC and DC. Some electronics can be more sensitive and require a more narrow voltage range or have a more stable range and some power sources can vary their range more and have a higher rate of fluctuation.

It really depends, but more and more of them last 10 years and have a battery built in. I'd say most of them now last 10 years. At least, in the US.

Yes. Follow the instructions for the specific device.

Null would be completely blind, no visual data at all.

Then what is 0 and 1 when you interpret my example like this? I think you missed the point of my example.

The whole point is to say that "no color" does not mean black and white. It just means no color data. Similar to how a person born completely blind does not see all black, they just don't see anything at all. They don't receive any visual data and their brain does not process color, light intensity, or any optic information at all.

No. The article states "total absence of working cones in their eye retinas, leaving them with only rods".

I'm trying to say that not being able to see color does not mean black and white or grayscale, it means the brain does not decipher color hue.

My example of the blind spot was to outline that a lack of receptors does not mean black, white, grey, whatever. It means a lack of signals to the brain to process anything. In the case of lacking cones, it means an inability to process color. When it's described as "grayscale" that's to help people understand a concept that is difficult for some people to grasp.

Think of it this way. Black is like 0, White is like 1, and Grayscale would be a float (decimal) between 0 and 1, while Colorblind is like NULL.

Well, the goal isn't to just create woolly mammoth-lile creatures by copying characteristics. The goal is to recreate the genome from what genome data we have into a living creature.

It's not like they are trying to create a sweded version, but take a creature that is already close and change the genes to match.

At least, that's how I understood it based on the article.

Well, it states "total color blindness" so, effectively none.

My point is that when you have "total color blindness" it simply means you cannot effectively discern the difference of of color. That does not mean "black and white."

For example, everyone has a blind spot in their eye where the optic nerve passes through the retina. This area has no photoreceptor cells, so there is a spot in each eye that cannot see. When you look through one eye and close the other, do you see a black void spot? Is it a blank white area? No. It's just... nothing.