241–250 of 263 posts
I don't see the point of these overpriced smartwatches and glasses that can barely do one thing (display notifications), but I want my future full AR/VR glasses, so I'm glad the early adopters pay for it. Right now, what I'd want is a very simple, slim, long-lasting watch that would notify me of emails, messages, phone calls and notifications based on their origin (business account, work account, personal, random). I…
I watched the Verge video this morning where they tried to explain how the hologram projector works, but I am still confused. How can it ensure a sharp image shining directly through your own intraocular lens (not the glasses themselves) to the retina? If you have a "longer" or "shorter" eyeball the light ray's focus point will not be on the retina itself.
Laser light is "coherent" both spatially and temporally. Spatial coherence allows the beam to be "collimated", which basically just means that it looks like a cylinder and not a cone. That's why you can shine a laser at the moon and see the spot; most of the energy from the laser makes it to the same place, bounces back to your eyes, and you get a bright spot. Shining a flashlight doesn't work because the light sprea…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I hate that I lost it, will have to spend an afternoon on the internet achive, But these are so tired. It's the exact same things people were spouting when phones started to have cameras. That came, and it turned out, having a quality camera you take with you is pretty cool and the end of the world didn't happen. Button cameras have existed for literally decades, if someone wants to take discrete pictures of you the…
It is regrettable that you're being downvoted so hard because I too recall these discussions. I also recall discussions about how toxic digital cameras would be with an "explosion of photography" "diluting the art" and causing an end to privacy. It's weird how prohibitionist people here are about cameras, but how other types of prohibition are axiomatically bad. Turns out that there is a big difference between capabi…
I think this looks awesome. The only problem is I have two pairs of glasses - one for reading/computer and one for everything else - so I'll need two of them. If I was them, I would add a bone conduction speaker in the stem so it can give you audible information as well. I also like the ring input device another commenter mentioned.[1] [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16308730
It would probably be too heavy, part of their 'non-intrusiveness' goal is to make it be very light.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I hate that I lost it, will have to spend an afternoon on the internet achive, But these are so tired. It's the exact same things people were spouting when phones started to have cameras. That came, and it turned out, having a quality camera you take with you is pretty cool and the end of the world didn't happen. Button cameras have existed for literally decades, if someone wants to take discrete pictures of you the…
There is a subtle but important difference between trusting someone doesn't have a hidden camera pointed at you and recording vs trusting someone to not have the camera that is on their face and pointed at you currently recording. Ultimately, yes, people have been able to take hidden photographs for a very long time. I think the concern is normalizing the removal of 90% of the steps involved in doing so.
I own a pair of glass, and while the thing has loads of problems (unergonomic , thermal issues, and terrible developer's experience being the main ones) nothing breaks my heart more than people just repeating back click bait about the end of privacy, because as wearables go I think there's a lot more potential in HUDs than smartwatches and the like.
Special things start to happen with retinal projection + bufferless, clockless, stochastic rendering of signed distance fields.
bufferless - Don't wait for an image, just stream pixels as fast as you find them
clockless - No world "ticks", the world is an append-only log of "percepts"¹ which can be projected onto any time.
stochastic - Don't wait for certainty about a pixel, just push out the most probable ones first
signed distance field - Afformentioned "percepts" don't have well defined boundaries like a polygon, instead "fields" centered on a point describe how light moves around them. Any two fields can be trivially summed, so you can ignore most of a scene when searching for a specific pixel near a small number of local fields.
Together they allow you to supply the eyes with nearly zero-latency data with arbitrarily low computing power.
¹ As an aside, there is evidence humans don't see a "now" tick either, we perceive "fields out of time" directly, log them, and interpolate their relationship to "now" thereafter, such that we feel that we are "seeing" something which our eyes have already stopped reporting about. Thus SDFs and clockless rendering are a natural fit and map well to human perception.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
GoPros (and other action cameras, I assume) have a feature like that. But please don't be "that guy" constantly recording unwilling subjects (except in your own home, of course)
> ... unwilling subjects (except in your own home, of course) Not even.
I think this looks awesome. The only problem is I have two pairs of glasses - one for reading/computer and one for everything else - so I'll need two of them. If I was them, I would add a bone conduction speaker in the stem so it can give you audible information as well. I also like the ring input device another commenter mentioned.[1] [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16308730
> If I was them, I would add a bone conduction speaker in the stem so it can give you audible information as well. It would probably be too heavy, part of their 'non-intrusiveness' goal is to make it be very light.