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

Apple Vision predictive bio-feedback

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 192 posts

Re: Apple Vision predictive bio-feedback

#161

Post by fragmede »

astrange wrote: post #157
Dudester230602 wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I was nearby when cool things happened, hire me now, need to pay Cupertino mortgage rate."

I'm not sure anyone under the age of 70 has a Cupertino mortgage.

Maybe not on a $3 million 5-bedroom mansion in the hills, but with $500,000 1 and 2-bedroom condos, 20% down payment is $100,000 k, which is affordable by a high level engineer or product designer making $500,000/yr, especially if it's a power DINK couple making close to $1mm/yr. Whether they want to invest in housing there is another story, but let's not pretend the upper class is priced out of Cupertino.

Eg https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/20488-Stevens-Creek-Blvd-... recently sold.

Re: Apple Vision predictive bio-feedback

#162

Post by [deleted] »

justinator wrote: post #146
bdowling wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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".

Again, original sentence, "All of these details are publicly available in patents, and were carefully written to not leak anything." I'll simplify: "Details available in patents, carefully written to not leak" What's been written? The patent. What is in the patent? Details. How are the details written to not leak? Carefully.

[deleted]

Re: Apple Vision predictive bio-feedback

#163

Post by makeitdouble »

rickdeckard wrote: post #30
makeitdouble wrote: post #7

This whole tweet had the same tone as when pop science crime investigation TV explains a criminal can be identified through its gait alone. It's always magic, except when the predictive model doesn't work and there is no corrective action possible on the user side. We're talking about physical reactions, so that means it's supposed to be the same through gender, age, race, health conditions from the algorithm's point…

*) They are foregoing controllers on the default interfaces, for the presentation of this initial product which is expected not to ship for another 6 months. It's what i would do as well if I would want to steer the developer ecosystem in a certain direction. From what I heard it also supports Bluetooth Mice and Keyboards to productively use a Macbook (which is streaming its video into the glasses)

Yes, Apple is clearly steering developers towards voice input and simple click based interfaces.

On Mice/Keyboards, I hope this supports third party VR controllers, otherwise the gaming/fitness side is really toast. That feels like a given, but considering the time it took for iOS to get Nintendo controller support, it's not unprecedented, especially given their relation with Meta.

Re: Apple Vision predictive bio-feedback

#164

Post by jameshart »

justinator wrote: post #146
bdowling wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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".

Again, original sentence, "All of these details are publicly available in patents, and were carefully written to not leak anything." I'll simplify: "Details available in patents, carefully written to not leak" What's been written? The patent. What is in the patent? Details. How are the details written to not leak? Carefully.

Stop being obtuse. The author's intent is clear.

What are we reading? A tweet.

What does it contain? Details.

What details? Ones that are publicly available in patents.

How have they been written? Carefully, to not leak anything.

Re: Apple Vision predictive bio-feedback

#166

Post by stevebmark »

Demystifying this concept: The mechanism is almost certainly just measuring pupil dilation, and maybe eye focus, if that's something you can track with an eye facing camera.

Source: Thinking Fast and Slow, where the initial inspiration for the book was an experiment noting that human's pupils reflexively dilate when they engage their "system two," aka the "slow brain," metaphorical part of their mind.

Re: Apple Vision predictive bio-feedback

#167

Post by astrange »

fragmede wrote: post #161
astrange wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure anyone under the age of 70 has a Cupertino mortgage.

Maybe not on a $3 million 5-bedroom mansion in the hills, but with $500,000 1 and 2-bedroom condos, 20% down payment is $100,000 k, which is affordable by a high level engineer or product designer making $500,000/yr, especially if it's a power DINK couple making close to $1mm/yr. Whether they want to invest in housing there is another story, but let's not pretend the upper class is priced out of Cupertino. Eg https:/…

There are not many of those. (Not many condos in the US in general for that matter, since they're pretty discouraged by housing laws.) Wonder how many 10s-100s of bids there were for it.

Anyway, I'm not accusing Cupertino residents of being upper class, I'm accusing them of being old.

Re: Apple Vision predictive bio-feedback

#168

Post by jscottmiller »

sterlingcrispin wrote: post #121

Hey 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…

This is fascinating, thanks for sharing! Oddly enough I worked on something similar in grad school in 2008 (https://cowboyscott.gg/research/micro08.pdf). Our methods and models were quite primitive (though we did have a nice eye tracker) and the work had mixed success. It's great seeing related approaches, but with proper budgets and teams!

Re: Apple Vision predictive bio-feedback

#169

Post by 8f2ab37a-ed6c »

vkou wrote: post #92
MichaelZuo wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is that sad? Partial information seems better then remaining 100% a trade secret.

No, it's worse. The point of patent protection is that you teach everyone how to build the thing that's being protected, in exchange for a monopoly. Not actually teaching people how to build the thing that's being protected, but still having a monopoly on it is the worst of all worlds. If you aren't going to teach us how to build something, don't expect patent protection for it. I'd rather you keep it as a trade secr…

Could the reason be that someone in China doesn’t have to abide by US patent law and will be free to reproduce the device, and sell it to the rest of the world? Are patents less useful once your competition is overseas?

Re: Apple Vision predictive bio-feedback

#170

Post by jitl »

pornel wrote: post #105
gumby wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually his statement is entirely within the spirit of patents: the secret sauce is disclosed in exchange for some limited monopoly; since it's been disclosed people can talk about it and learn from it. (None of this comment should be interpreted as a defense of the travesty that the patent system has become)

But can they, really? The language of patents is an obfuscated legalese, further confused by many variants of the claims that may not make any sense. They're far far from anything educational.

I’ve found patents to be helpful despite the legalese.
Post reply on HN