next level humble-bragging. in post and his replies
Totally. "10% of my life" sounds a lot more significant than "3.5 years"
When someone starts a sentence like this, I think its fair to assume that they are bragging about other things as well.
Apple Vision predictive bio-feedback
131–140 of 192 posts
Re: Apple Vision predictive bio-feedback
#132Soo… is this real? Did those features really make it into the product as of now? I don’t recall any of these details being mentioned.
> measurements like eye tracking, electrical activity in the brain, heart beats and rhythms, muscle activity, blood density in the brain, blood pressure, skin conductance etc.
The headset does not appear to track most of these things.
Re: Apple Vision predictive bio-feedback
#133tweet should have been a blog post.
more like a brag post
Re: Apple Vision predictive bio-feedback
#134Hey I appreciate the general lack of cruelty so far in the comments, sometimes HN can be pretty rough. The weird phrasing in the tweet is because I can't talk about any of the work I did due to NDA's besides my job description and those patents. But I had a pretty unusual role all things considered. I was also trying to clarify in the tweet that these aren't meant to be interpreted as unannounced existing features or…
Congrats on the launch! Seems like a really fun project to work on. And thanks for sharing what you can :)
Re: Apple Vision predictive bio-feedback
#135Oh so now the hot new thing is a computing device that actively tries to guess its user’s emotional state (using various methods, including introducing new stimuli) and then then CHANGES ITS BEHAVIOR based on the results! The Free Software people were right - a device this intimate needs to have publicly available, verifiable source code.
> Oh so now the hot new thing is a computing device that actively tries to guess its user’s emotional state It also induces different states by way of imperceptible stimuli and measured the response. The tweet got increasingly dystopian the more I read; spine-chilling stuff. Had this been about the Quest, people in this thread would be reasonably apoplectic. Imagine what Saudi Arabia or a Gambling or News app could d…
>It also induces different states by way of imperceptible stimuli and measured the response
Are you sure? Am I missing that part? I see this:
>Other tricks to infer cognitive state involved quickly flashing visuals or sounds to a user in ways they may not perceive, and then measuring their reaction to it.
But that doesn't say they're inducing states but rather trying to figure out the state. Trying to understand if someone is mad does not seem quite as dystopian as trying to make someone mad.
Re: Apple Vision predictive bio-feedback
#136Earlier quoted context omitted.
Think of the possibilities. -A VR show can modify the jokes in real time if they know how funny you find them. -A VR casino can offer a 'full biometrics' table for the players who really think they know how to bluff -A VR porno can have your VR GF climax at the same time as you
Regarding your first bullet, I am not sure if that's what people want. One of the best part of story telling like a TV show or movie is that everyone watched the same thing and then can refer to it later. How much more isolating does VR tech need to be?
> How much more isolating does VR tech need to be?
As isolating as it needs to be to extract max revenue. Your fine-tuned proclivities profile will be one more thing to lock you onto the platform, and an opportunity for product placement/ ads. Marketers would love to have their brand associated with happy thoughts (and happy thoughts only).
Re: Apple Vision predictive bio-feedback
#137"All of these details are publicly available in patents, and were carefully written to not leak anything." This part makes me sad about patents and original idea behind them. This actually is the opposite of original idea why people came up with the idea of patenting something. To spread the knowledge and to award inventors. Not to stifle the competition.
I’m gonna avoid opining on the value of the patent system in general. But one way of reading this statement is that the patents were written to avoid leaking anything about what the technology was going to be used for. It’s entirely possible that the patents created for the Vision Pro are good enough to recreate many of the individual components that have been patented, but don’t help you assemble the entire product.…
>Which I would argue is entirely within the sprit of the patent system.
I don't think so. The spirit of the patent system is you submit your product to them in the form of a working model. You get to patent that device. Tearing it apart into individual inventions to me is against the spirit.
Of course none of this matters anymore, we are far down the rabbit hole.
Re: Apple Vision predictive bio-feedback
#138"All of these details are publicly available in patents, and were carefully written to not leak anything." This part makes me sad about patents and original idea behind them. This actually is the opposite of original idea why people came up with the idea of patenting something. To spread the knowledge and to award inventors. Not to stifle the competition.
What he wrote was, "These details ... were carefully written to not leak anything."
This is standard CYA language from an employee who doesn't want to get in trouble for leaking anything not publicly known (e.g., something not in a patent document).
Re: Apple Vision predictive bio-feedback
#139Earlier quoted context omitted.
I could be wrong, but I took that to mean the tweet thread was written not to leak anything that wasn’t already publicly available in the patents. Not that the patents were written to not disclose anything. In which case patent regime is working exactly as intended and promoting dissemination of ideas while still providing the (time limited) economic advantages to the inventor.
As is written, the subject of what's, "carefully written" are, "the details [...] in patents".
The "in patents" modifies "available", not "details".
Had he wanted to state that the patents were carefully written, he would have written "which", not "and".
Re: Apple Vision predictive bio-feedback
#140I wonder if him not having worked on Apple Vision for the last >1.5 years means they distanced themselves from his "vision, strategy and direction" or even gave up on it.
Judging from his other tweets, he seems really into crypto and making art projects out of crypto tech. I can't say I really understand the art - and I went to school with him, had the same professors, etc. I'm just scratching my head when I read his tweets. But well: he's worth many millions and I still have housemates so I guess capitalism has crown him in the lead.
[deleted]