That s right, four sensors that are on your forehead and picking up the electromagnetic activity off your brain. 0k. and what does that mean its going to learn from me? it s going to take this raw data right off your headset. 0ur set up processes it in lots of different ways, which kind of indicate sort of what your brain s doing when you re looking at the art. when the brain recognises - something in the visual input, for example, a face - or an object, like a tool or anything like that, - there are certain signatures in the signal that we can pick up, and what art fund - and the mill have done is use these signals or recognise - these signals in a dynamic way when the person is wearing. the headset, to display them in that visualisation, - in 3d form, dynamically, while the person - is engaging with art. i ve onlyjust identified that there s women dancing there. it aims to show that art isn t a passive experience. what we wanted to show people
Hand, judges the judges waiting now for about six weeks, he s going to get a pre-sentencing report. they re working on now hi, going to be looking as he learned anything as he is, he contrite. what we just saw, what we saw it together there. so kinda like x that to me most serious is this is not the typical falsification of business records cash said with all you think of them as like the average person might think was like a green eye shade the thing like and an accountant putting a book in the wrong drawer or something like that. this is the connection crime here. the object crime was a violation of new york election law before 34 separate felony counts where the jury found unanimously, then new york state election law was violated. who likes to rant and rave constantly about election interference. election interference. well, the guy who was just convicted of 34 counts, essentially if of election interference in an election in 2016, that was actually close enough that the actions he stands convicted of
Does, to protect his family, his reputation, and his i think there s a typo here, it says brink. you will hear about hush money payments from another individual. how do you make sense of this, temidayo sno. i think, one, it is not normal to object during someone s opening statement. as lawyers at trial, it has to be pretty egregious in your perspective to stand out. one, it s just as a professional courtesy. people do not look friendly on that. it can make you look weak. part of your job as a prosecutor is you want to exert strength to the jury. as prosecutor that is so important. i think for the prosecutors to object and to get overruled, that s not a good start there. if you re going to object, you want to stand on very sure ground. now, to this meeting between that merchan just called. it may be the fact that we re seeing multiple objections and he may be saying what s going
Asking one of the attorneys to tell todd blanche something. blanche is the one who is giving the statement, the opening statement for the defense team right now. so maya, it sounds like a lot of this is very sort of off script as to how opening statements go. first question, why would there have been an objection. they are trying to paint this sinister, it is a crime, entering into a nondisclosure agreement is perfectly legal as something that the prosecution had objected to. i can t get in the mind of the prosecution here. i completely agree with temidayo, it s not a common thing to stand up and object, but it sounds like they re getting very concerned about that/blanche is taking up too much of a role of the judge and telling the jury what the law is. it is only the judge that