Hands-on with HoloLens: On the cusp of a revolution • Hacker News Board

Re: Hands-on with HoloLens: On the cusp of a revolution

#91

Post by nl » Sun, Apr 03, 2016, 11:39 AM UTC

incepted wrote: post #42

nl wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So fundamentally VR has more potential than AR I couldn't agree more completely. I live in a physical world, and my god I wish I could connect it better to the information world. I don't care at all about VR. I'll try it because it's new, but I have close to zero interest in gaming and beyond that there a very few use cases where it is interesting. Design maybe, but a lot of these uses cases actually work better as A…

> I couldn't agree more completely. Mmmh... you say you agree with the previous poster but your message seems to disagree completely.

Ah yes! Mistyping...

Re: Hands-on with HoloLens: On the cusp of a revolution

#92

Post by mcferrin » Sun, Apr 03, 2016, 1:00 PM UTC

VonGuard wrote: post #56

spacecity1971 wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you've demoed Magic Leap? What differences did you see that would make it a waste of Google's money?

Magic Leap is based on super complex tech that draws images right onto your retina. It's the kind of tech that will take them another couple of years to make small enough to package, and possibly another few years to build the tools to develop for it and to ensure it's not actually blinding people by shining bright lights right into their eye. A friend of mine used it and said Magic Leap, initially, is like trying to…

Sounds like Magic Leap is the future and HoloLens is now. I cannot imagine that we would be satisfied using all these clunky devices for long.

Re: Hands-on with HoloLens: On the cusp of a revolution

#93

Post by Razengan » Wed, Apr 06, 2016, 11:51 AM UTC

goldenkey wrote: post #35

Razengan wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So fundamentally VR has more potential than AR. Fundamentally, VR just has a different potential than AR. > Not to mention the need to carry AR with you wherever you go if you want to use it in the "real world", power it, compute, etc. You need to carry the VR headsets and their host-devices with you too. I believe we should clearly delineate the definitions of VR vs AR first. Virtual Reality should be things like…

Thank you for your explanation. It seems like for any renaissance man programmer, either of these areas are ripe for indivuality and invention in terms of new experiences in the form of apps for these vr and ar devices. Thoughts? And to maybe extend the discussion abit, what about devices that plug right into the centers of consciousness. Is that just more invasive, arguably better AR or is it VR? What do better hear…

My reply to daveguy might apply to some of your questions, not sure if you saw it: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11412809

Re: Hands-on with HoloLens: On the cusp of a revolution

#94

Post by goldenkey » Fri, Apr 08, 2016, 9:23 AM UTC

Razengan wrote: post #76

daveguy wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like this distinction. By this definition something like Amazon Echo would be augmented reality, but the hololens would be virtual reality -- unless everyone is wearing a hololens? Since you mentioned television as an example I guess I understand what you are trying to say. Although I do think that definition adjustment would be a tough sell (TV as AR). That definition certainly works for the most extreme cases of…

I think the differentiator between AR and VR should be this question: Can other humans and non-human lifeforms perceive a change or difference in reality as a result of that device? TV can be considered a primitive form of reality augmentation. As I said even your cat can see and hear what's on. Even aliens who see in an entirely different spectrum (or don't have any vision at all) will be able to pick up the colors…

I cant help but alarm you that even consciousness itself is a vulnerable state of existence in possible deception. Thats why Alan Watts wrote about the Wisdom of Insecurity. Dream theory exists. Etc. I dont know how well these notions you mention about knowing virtual from pure are founded when even our own standards can be undermined by being deceptive. Cant really put a definition on a jenga board and give it any credence. It sounds sickening but I'd say that we must use the definition of working memory in our distinction. Which unfortunately means that alzheimers patients and those with faulty memory are indeed, compromised with regard to their innate sense of a cohesive and sensible reality. They truly are living in AR..