Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Could we make the web more immersive using a simple optical illusion?

shopify.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 277 posts

Re: Could we make the web more immersive using a simple optical illusion?

#211

Post by jszymborski »

Cpoll wrote: post #201
photochemsyn wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a relatively invasive technique that requires a computer's camera to record details of a person's face, and that's marketable data that any commercial shopping site would likely collect and sell on to other parties. It'd be much simpler to implement arrow key / spacebar navigation through a 3D scene (still computationally expensive relative to rendering the standard HTML/CSS/JS page), but then that data couldn't…

> invasive technique It wouldn't be so bad if it were a browser feature, i.e. a website can use an "Eye Tracking" API instead of the Camera API (with permission granted), and get limited data.

But of course, just like gait detection and etc... there would be a whole genre of preprints dedicated to eye tracking fingerprinting

Re: Could we make the web more immersive using a simple optical illusion?

#212

Post by CyberDildonics »

once_inc wrote: post #53
6177c40f wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately it's stuff like this that's poisoned otherwise cool new tech for me. I can't help but wonder "how will this be used to advertise to me?"

One of the cooler takes of Bitcoin or "crypto" is that you can use native tokens to pay for visiting websites. A browser plugin combined with a lightning wallet for instance could enable a website to request a payment of any amount of Satoshis to view the site, or it will redirect you to a 402 error page. This generates a way of monetizing content without the need for ads or tracking.

Bitcoin has a throughput of 1 KB/s for the entire world, so it will never be used for micro transactions.

Re: Could we make the web more immersive using a simple optical illusion?

#213

Post by jimktrains2 »

astrange wrote: post #44
ilkke wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Re UI, my theory is that this is partly because minimalism doesn't become dated as fast. Related, I remember that what blew me away upon seeing the 3DS for the first time was not the 3d playfield (which looked exactly as I expected), but the UI in 3D. It really felt like a glimpse into an exciting future.

Minimal "flat" UIs are possible for normal people to implement. In the 2000s I had no idea how I was supposed to make a button that looks like it's made of drop shadows and fine Corinthian leather for a project in my free time. (For that matter I don't know how I'd get it done for a professional project either.)

Why not use the system default controls and not reïnvent the wheel?

Re: Could we make the web more immersive using a simple optical illusion?

#214

Post by KineticLensman »

Hendrikto wrote: post #168
IIAOPSW wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's why minimalism has such staying power. Fundamentally, pleasing design is about repetition and consistency. Brian loves patterns, that's all there is to it. Good graphic appeal isn't a seasoning like salt which you can just sprinkle on by paying for a few better "designed" assets. Its possible to make really pleasing design out of parts that are individually seen as cheap and low quality. Its also possible to m…

> Brian loves patterns, that's all there is to it. Who is this Brian you are speaking of?

The name's Damage. Brian Damage

Re: Could we make the web more immersive using a simple optical illusion?

#215

Post by flohofwoe »

TL;DR: the parallax effect only looks 'impressive' on video, because our brain inteprets it as part of the filmed environment, but when you sit directly in front of the screen the illusion falls apart (unless you use some stereoscopic optics to trick your brain again into intepreting the parallax effect as 3D).

It was the perfect nerd-bait for YouTube, but not much more ;)

Re: Could we make the web more immersive using a simple optical illusion?

#216

Post by mike_hearn »

mwcampbell wrote: post #209
mike_hearn wrote: post #145

A bit depressing in some ways. This is a pattern I've seen repeatedly, especially in the last 10 years or so - people want to do something innovative but shoot themselves in the foot up front by insisting it has to be in the browser. Then they discover that browsers are incredibly hostile environments for doing innovation projects, and instead of concluding the obvious (we should do it with a desktop app) they either…

In light of the current top comment thread [1], I'm glad the state of browser APIs is holding back this particular "innovation". And I wonder if the friction of distributing and installing desktop apps is actually a good thing, even though it's affecting my current (non-AccessKit) project. It means you have to be really sure that what you're doing deserves to exist outside the good constraints of the browser. I'm not…

I mean, sure, I personally wouldn't care for this feature, but that's because I'm a bloke and don't derive much joy from shopping. My girlfriend though absolutely loves window shopping. I think this sort of feature would be far more appealing to her than me.

For better or worse we can't know how popular this sort of thing would be, because their project failed for tech reasons before even getting to the point of doing market research or usability testing. That's the higher level issue here, I think. If they'd gone the desktop route they could have at least tried it and seen what people thought, then later looked for ways to shrink it down to fit inside the browser. By starting with that requirement as axiomatic they never even got as far as running a usability testing day.

Re: Could we make the web more immersive using a simple optical illusion?

#219

Post by Filligree »

photochemsyn wrote: post #173
codeulike wrote: post #141

Imagine, for example, opening your favorite brand’s website and being presented with a miniature virtual storefront. You could look at their most popular products as if you were standing on a sidewalk peering into their shop. I imagined this as instructed as was simultaneously bored and depressed. Why does it always have to be about shopping.

It's a relatively invasive technique that requires a computer's camera to record details of a person's face, and that's marketable data that any commercial shopping site would likely collect and sell on to other parties. It'd be much simpler to implement arrow key / spacebar navigation through a 3D scene (still computationally expensive relative to rendering the standard HTML/CSS/JS page), but then that data couldn't…

"Details of a person's face is marketable data".

Okay, it's not that I don't believe you, but what do they do with that data? How does it help? Unless you're marketing acne cream, I suppose.

Re: Could we make the web more immersive using a simple optical illusion?

#220

Post by nottorp »

pmoriarty wrote: post #147
nottorp wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I can't help but wonder "how will this be used to advertise to me?" Or lie to you? VR storefront eh? Bet the product will look a lot better than it actually does in real life.

If the VR is good enough, why would you even bother to visit it in real life?

To see the actual product they're trying to sell?

This is what TFA quoted as an application for the tech, virtual storefronts presumably for physical products.

Post reply on HN