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

231–240 of 277 posts

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

#231

Post by anon115 »

chaostheory wrote: post #195
dalbasal wrote: post #112

The techniques themselves are very cool and inspiring. That said, the reason such things do/don't take off isn't about how cool they are, generally. It's about how useful they are. Even for games, immersion and realism are secondary to gameplay. For most applications, it's hard to see how a "realistic window" is useful. A flat paper, paper-like screen is better to read off, for example. Cool tech. Definitely worth ex…

Just apply this to CAD or 3D modeling software. I can also see doctors having a use for this tech

at first id think this was cool but moving my head constantly isnt that gonna start hurtin?

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

#232

Post by anon115 »

chaostheory wrote: post #195
dalbasal wrote: post #112

The techniques themselves are very cool and inspiring. That said, the reason such things do/don't take off isn't about how cool they are, generally. It's about how useful they are. Even for games, immersion and realism are secondary to gameplay. For most applications, it's hard to see how a "realistic window" is useful. A flat paper, paper-like screen is better to read off, for example. Cool tech. Definitely worth ex…

Just apply this to CAD or 3D modeling software. I can also see doctors having a use for this tech

i think keeping the 3d AR aspect of it and moving the object/mesh with a very intuitive controller for 3d sculpting instead of having to turn my head and walk around behind it to modify it is the way to go.

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

#233

Post by nfgrep »

chaostheory wrote: post #176
somewhereoutth wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple is basically Bauhaus for nerd stuff - and that is no small thing. Perhaps if the microcomputer had been first commercialised in Europe they'd all look like that anyway.

Personally, I view Apple more as a fashion house that sells tech.

Those fashion designers make a pretty mean little RISC chip.

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

#234

Post by Groxx »

Broadly speaking: yes! I wish we used this more, it's not hard and it looks very convincing and subtle stuff feels quite good...

... when latencies are VR-like. When it lags even a little, it feels awful. So it tends to work pretty well for tech demos like this, and not at all when exposed to the real world.

Specialized hardware and software stacks can do a pretty good job - see the Fire Phone for an example there. It did quite well on technical notes, the experience was smooth and battery-efficient(-enough) and the illusion was almost fast enough to be transparent.

But it failed. Unless we get this kind of thing baked into everything for years, it will continue to fail, because there will be no content. And integrated webcams and their related software continue to be utter shit. We're not close to (or even moving towards) being able to use this, unless Apple surprises everyone in their next lineup and kicks off a renaissance.

..... and that's before getting into privacy issues with exposing an API that reveals info about your face. It's a harder practical realm than it seems it should be, when people have been making very effective tech demos for decades on commodity (but specific) hardware.

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

#235

Post by rvba »

Filligree wrote: post #219
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…

"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.

Some bad actor would check out what is in your apartment and then market to you.

Say they see you have legos, they market legos.

Or they see what you have (say a gun) so they rob you.

Or they track your habits. We noticed your apartment is dirty/messy - pay us a ransom or we post on linkedin or call CPS. Or use our cleaning service.

Also I bet you have to walk fully dressed when browsing (especially women) and you need to shave, or your social score drops.

Ah and will you know if the website ever stopped watching? Is it watching you (and recording) having sex?

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

#236

Post by jchw »

ithinkso wrote: post #123
jchw wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actually did use Compiz+Beryll for a fairly long while. Admittedly, the bugs were annoying, but after switching off the most gimmicky bits or at least making them less pronounced (like Wobbly Windows, lol) I found it to be quite nice to use. It felt a bit like if you were using WindowBlinds but supercharged. I later switched to i3wm and threw away desktop effects though. I wouldn't mind them, but I don't miss them…

The sole reason I had compiz back then was to have the cube effect. I do miss my cube even in i3

I totally agree: I was a big fan of the desktop cube. I think I'm okay now, as I think I'd just about die without at least numbered workspaces, but I might be OK with getting that one back.

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

#237

Post by hgsgm »

VLM wrote: post #192
riidom wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I imagine a youtube where the ads would pause as soon as you don't look at them anymore. Like that one black mirror episode. But yes, first promote some gimmicky fun stuff to get the foot in the door and when it has arrived, show the real face.

The other way around, for sure, to distract and make you look back at the thing moving in the corner of your eye.

They mean that the ad won't finish until you watch it.

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

#238

Post by hgsgm »

Planktonne wrote: post #124

> 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 am imagining it, and it's worse than the current norm.

> Imagine, for example, opening your favorite brand’s website

My what?

Do these people ever leave their fantasy land?

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

#239

Post by hgsgm »

mabbo wrote: post #138
bobnamob wrote: post #37

Cynical take: Seems like an excuse for Shopify to add eye tracking to product pages for ad analytics

I think it's important to remember that Shopify doesn't have a singular ad product. It's a platform to build a web store on, and merchants can add whatever they want to their shop, but Shopify doesn't collect any data across shops. That's the shop's data, not Shopify's. Bias: my team at Shopify helps merchants launch their shop and get their initial sales.

Y'all are happy to spam people with onboarding messages at the email address that a customer gave you and you didn't bother to verify.

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

#240

Post by _dain_ »

IIAOPSW wrote: post #108
noduerme wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm going to pull a print/graphic designer card and say that "minimalism" isn't actually a style. I think I understand how it's being used in this conversation as a shorthand for "2002-2012 Google UI", which had a massive impact on the way people thought about web design. But I don't think it's fair to say that the reason for the staying power of that particular type of minimalist design is simple repetition or consi…

I think we agree on a lot of things which aren't vocabulary. Well, that and jewel box full of Easter eggs. I have no idea wth you mean or why non designers would care. But you've touched upon one of my biggest gripes, the difference between simplification and reduction. A simplification organizes information into useful patterns so that it can hide away redundancy. A reduction cuts information for the sake of present…

Just want to say, I loved clicking on that mta.info link and seeing the SVG load in gradually, first the coarse map elements, then the coloured subway lines, then finer and finer details and labels. Felt like some kind of crescendo of dataviz, as if the THX sound effect ought to play over it. 10/10.
Post reply on HN