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

Meta Ray-Ban Display

meta.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

411–420 of 993 posts

Re: Meta Ray-Ban Display

#411

Post by xdfgh1112 »

tsimionescu wrote: post #330
jdprgm wrote: post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I remain convinced VR gaming is niche because despite these companies being willing to drop boatloads of money on all kinds of things they for some reason never decided to just allocate a few billion to create a handful of true AAA games and jumpstart the industry. I think even just 3 proper games with several hundred mil budgets and VR gaming might be in an entirely different space than it is now.

I think this is extremely doubtful. The reality remains that it's impossible to make a first person or even third person VR game with free movement, because of fundamental limitations in how human brains process movement. Having your eyes tell you are moving but your muscles and inner ear tell you that you are not makes you extremely sick very quickly, and technology can't actually fix this. The better and more immer…

Those games literally exist now. Almost all new VR games use free movement not teleportation. It is frustrating that you seem to be talking confidently when your knowledge is 5 years out of date.

Re: Meta Ray-Ban Display

#412

Post by mietek »

thot_experiment wrote: post #75

Just in case someone is working on this type of thing. I will easily pay $1000 for an open source glasses thingy that has a monochrome laser display projecting directly onto my retina. IIRC Bosch and Intel have tried this before and the prototypes never went anywhere so there's probably a really good hardware reason why it's not happening but I want that more than any other hardware, it doesn't even have to be both e…

Old Microvision Nomad units from around 2004 pop up on eBay from time to time. I have one; it's a monocular red laser retinal projection display, with a permanently attached computing unit running an ancient version of Windows CE. It's bulky, finicky, and nowhere near open source; there's hardly any documentation for it, but it does work somewhat. I haven't done anything interesting with it yet, because it doesn't have a IMU, and integrating one with it has been difficult.

Microsoft Hololens 2 also used Microvision-derived laser retinal projection technology. I don't have one, so I can't say how well it really works, but Microsoft seems to have given up on it as well.

If you relax your requirements and allow for a green holographic waveguide display, there are a few other options, but still nothing open source that I'm aware of.

Re: Meta Ray-Ban Display

#413

Post by Youden »

zmmmmm wrote: post #168
SchemaLoad wrote: post #116

>Meta Ray-Ban Display glasses are designed to help you look up and stay present. With a quick glance at the in-lens display, you can accomplish everyday tasks—like checking messages, previewing photos, and collaborating with visual Meta AI prompts Can you imagine trying to talk to someone face to face, but they are giving you a blank stare as random notifications and tiktok videos are being beamed inbetween their eye…

I do think we're in for a bit of a reality check on how human attention works. I have a HUD in my car that shows me directions, speed etc and when I'm looking at that the rest of the view out the windscreen is hardly even there to my visual perception even though I'm looking right at it. This seems to be getting largely overlooked but I feel like over time statistics are going to emerge that HUD type displays are inc…

You mean a HUD projected on the windshield itself? That's not my experience with it at all; I don't have to "look at" it, when my eyes are focused on the road in front of me, the HUD is sharp enough and positioned so that I always know my speed etc. without having to actively look for it.

Your car might have settings to adjust it somehow, have you tried those?

Re: Meta Ray-Ban Display

#414

Post by bauruine »

mrandish wrote: post #314
zmmmmm wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you watch it carefully, he preempts the AI with "What do I do first" before it even answered the first time. This strongly suggests it did this in rehearsal to me and hence was far more than just "bad luck" or bad connectivity. Perhaps the bad connectivity stopped the override from working and it just kept repeating the previous response. Either way it suggests some troubling early implications about how well Meta…

> Either way it suggests some troubling early implications about how well Meta's AI work is going I fully expect the AI to suck initially and then over many months of updates evolve to mostly annoying and only occasionally mildly useful. However, the live stage demo failing isn't necessarily supporting evidence. Live stage demos involving Wifi are just hard because in addition to the normal device functionality they'…

I assume you couldn't watch the video because it's just a live stream of a guy standing in a kitchen and talking to his glasses. He's not on the stage with hundreds of people on the wifi and you can't see what the glasses are displaying at all.

Re: Meta Ray-Ban Display

#415

Post by NitpickLawyer »

riffraff wrote: post #355
danpalmer wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reducing temperature to 0 doesn't make LLMs deterministic. There's still a bunch of other issues such as float math results depending on which order you perform mathematically commutative operations in.

I keep reading this but I don't get it: for the same input shouldn't the order of resulting operations be deterministic too?

It gets more complicated with things like batch processing. Depending on where in the stack your query gets placed, and how the underlying hardware works, and how the software stack was implemented, you might get small differences that get compounded over many token generations. (vLLM - a popular inference engine, has this problem as well).

Re: Meta Ray-Ban Display

#417

Post by twalichiewicz »

llmthrow0827 wrote: post #113
wronglebowski wrote: post #22

The live demo of this is brutal. https://x.com/ns123abc/status/1968469616545452055

All the VR/AR/XR demos are so insanely trivial and yet still manage to be much more difficult than current methods of doing things. Like, really, cooking? Normal method: * Search for a recipe * Leave my phone on a stand and glance at it if I forget a step Meta glasses: * Put glasses on (there's a reason I got lasek, it's because wearing glasses sucks) * Talk into the void, trying to figure out how to describe my prob…

Watching the announcement, every feature felt like something my phone already does—better.

With glasses, you have to aim your head at whatever you want the AI to see. With a phone, you just point the camera while your hands stay free. Even in Meta’s demo, the presenter had to look back down at the counter because the AI couldn’t see the ingredients.

It feels like the same dead end we saw with Rabbit and the Humane pin—clever hardware that solves nothing the phone doesn’t already do. Maybe there’s a niche if you already wear glasses every day, but beyond that it’s hard to see the case.

Re: Meta Ray-Ban Display

#418

Post by NitpickLawyer »

yakz wrote: post #16
paxys wrote: post #9

I saw the keynote, and while everything about the glasses was more or less as expected, seeing Zuck easily navigate the interface and type 30 words per minute while barely moving his fingers was a true WTF moment. If they can actually make the neural interface work that well then Meta has won this round.

Doesn’t that make the wrist accessory the important part? The chunky glasses look like they’re still too early, not enough tech.

> still too early, not enough tech.

At one point I was tracking a company researching beaming images straight on your eye. I think they were MS related, but not sure. After a while they stopped updating, so I guess that went nowhere? It seemed really promising.

Re: Meta Ray-Ban Display

#419

Post by mietek »

Philpax wrote: post #159
thot_experiment wrote: post #75

Just in case someone is working on this type of thing. I will easily pay $1000 for an open source glasses thingy that has a monochrome laser display projecting directly onto my retina. IIRC Bosch and Intel have tried this before and the prototypes never went anywhere so there's probably a really good hardware reason why it's not happening but I want that more than any other hardware, it doesn't even have to be both e…

Apple is rumoured to have tried this and caused eye damage as a result: https://macdailynews.com/2017/04/20/leaked-document-details-... It's quite difficult to do that safely, as it turns out! I would love a virtual retinal display, but I assume there's a good reason that nobody has managed to ship one in the last two decades.

Microvision Nomad was indeed two decades ago, but Microsoft Hololens 2 also used laser retinal projection.

Re: Meta Ray-Ban Display

#420

Post by mavamaarten »

notpushkin wrote: post #211
JKCalhoun wrote: post #115

They have a brand problem. Absolutely no way I buy anything from Meta.

I would probably buy a pair once there’s some progress on an alternative firmware for those. The price is (hopefully) subsidized, so putting Meta in the red while getting some cool tech would be nice. (Same reason I own a Quest 3.)

Hah, same reason I bought my Quest 2. Figured I could buy a device that is subsidized by them, and then buy zero games on their platform and stream from my PC instead.

I was very angry though when they suddenly took away my USB debugging and had to go through another round of "verification".

Post reply on HN