All three of those links are completely unrelated to computer vision systems in robotics. The first is a link to a picture taken with an AFM, the second is a very small camera with obviously terrible resolution (20x20px), and the third (posted below), is of another completely different instrument. And I guarantee you all three instruments cost tens of thousands of dollars.
Here's another number for how ridiculous the resolution claim is. They claim it works in a 8ft^3 volume... let's assume the 2D projection of this is a 2ftx2ft plane. This is equivalent to an area of 371612160000 microns^2. That's 300 billion microns^2, or 3x10^11 points of data. So we're talking about processing a point cloud on the order of hundreds of billions of points in real time over USB. How realistic is that? Let's assume they're using USB 3.0, with a theoretical maximum transmission speed of 5 Gbit/s. This means every second the sensor is able to send a maximum of 5x10^9 bits of data to the computer. If each point were only 1 bit (0/1), then the sensor would be able to deliver a full scan to the computer at.016 Hz. This means in the absolute best case scenario you'll get a full scan once every minute. With real world data transmission speeds and actual data (not just 0/1 bits) this update rate is going to suffer significantly. If we assume each measurement has double precision (that's 16 bits of data for every point in the cloud) the full point cloud comes out to 5.9x10^12 bits for transmission. That's an update rate of.0008 Hz at USB 3.0 theoretical maximum transfer speed, or a full scan every 1180 seconds (20 minutes).
all entrants have to make clear up front what their contribution to their project was, how much help they had from others etc.
Yeah of course they have to. That's the way it was back when I was in the fair. But this is not what happens. My highschool had a very large science program and we sent about 90-100 kids a year to regional fairs. For some reason it was the kids who had researcher/professor/PhD/engineer parents who always made it to the international fair. After competing in these fairs year after year, you get to know the crowd, who's legit, and what kind of nonsense is going on.
If you really talk to these kids on a peer level (which you'll never be able to do at this point) you can see right through them. The judges are about the last people who have a grasp on the true character of some of these kids. I personally know a kid who completely faked his entire project year after year and never got caught. He was really good at faking work... probably was more effort than it would have taken to actually to the project. He won several high profile special awards from the military and armed forces for his "research."
It currently does not claim a specific resolution. Just the relative improvement values of 100x and 200x.
The link I posted above still contains the text which I also quoted above. It's still slashdotted but eventually came up.
Here is the text of the full paragraph, emphasis mine:
Say goodbye to your mouse and keyboard.
Leap represents an entirely new way to interact with your computers. It’s more accurate than a mouse, as reliable as a keyboard and more sensitive than a touchscreen. For the first time, you can control a computer in three dimensions with your natural hand and finger movements.
This isn’t a game system that roughly maps your hand movements. The Leap technology is 200 times more accurate than anything else on the market — at any price point. Just about the size of a flash drive, the Leap can distinguish your individual fingers and track your movements down to a 1/100th of a millimeter.
This is like day one of the mouse. Except, no one needs an instruction manual for their hands.
More like the "best and the brightest" aren't necessarily any better and brighter than anyone else, but had certain resources that made their work more impressive.
I remember reading a slashdot news story about another teen science fair winner with some awesome result, but someone pointed out that he essentially copied someone else's PhD dissertation. Kinda made me skeptical about amazing science fair results. In this case, was he a chemical engineer? How did he even get access to pancreatic cancer urine samples?
I participated in ISEF from 7th grade until 12th, with varying levels of success. I did very well, but never as well as this kid, but I dated a girl for 4 years who basically won the same place. This competition is very high stakes, as the winners basically get to choose their school from the top schools in the country. I attribute my acceptance into CMU more to ISEF than anything else I did in Highschool.
With such high stakes, there is a lot of parental support, especially from parents who are scientists and engineers. A friend of mine had unlimited access through her family to a MRI machine. She did very well and went on to MIT. Another friend had access to vast quantities of microbial data through her mom. Other people had their parents design and supervise the experiments, while others still performed extensive and impressive statistical tests well beyond the skill of a 14 year old, thanks to their parents. After dating my girlfriend for some time, who again placed as well as the kid in the story, she revealed to me her father basically did all the work.
None of this is ever disclosed at the fair, and all work is always presented by the students to be their own original research. I'm not saying the kids in question were dumb... quite the opposite they were brilliant. But they also had a great deal of extra help from highly educated people to "guide" their research. I'm also not saying this was the case for the winner this year, but it wouldn't surprise me if it was.
see what (amateur) robots can do these days merely on "sight".
Sorry, even the best applications of vision in robotics at the top universities and companies in the world are not this accurate. A sensor as accurate as they're claiming should be able to measure the height of a grain of salt sitting on a table top.
I don't think so, since they talk about chaining several of these together to increase the effective workspace. If they're bouncing signals all over the place, there would be an unmanageable amount of crosstalk between sensors.
I'm having huge difficulty understanding how this is getting rolled out for video gaming instead of manufacturing.
Yes! This is something I was also thinking. This kind of technology would be great in medicine, manufacturing, various industrial applications, robotics, retail... they could have complete domination over various sectors worth billions. Yet they're shooting for consumer electronics? Seriously?
FOV is 57 horizontally and 43, with a maximum range of about 20 ft. I don't know how much volume that is, but it's significantly larger than 8 cubic feet.
I agree... they're releasing absolutely zero tangible information about the product while accepting pre-orders and developer applications. Seems like they want to bring their investors some numbers on how many people are interested. It remains to be seen if this $70 price is even realistic... and for that matter exactly what kind of technology this actually is.
I'm having trouble understanding exactly what kinds of technology this device is using to obtain accuracy on the level of 10 micrometers for $70. On the website they only state:
Leap Motion technology is a breakthrough in computer interaction, using a patented mathematical approach to 3D, touch-free motion sensing and motion control software that’s unlike anything that currently exists on the market or in academia. Developed over the past 4 years, Leap Motion moves far beyond the current technologies designed for distant arm waving.
But that say a whole lot of nothing... Why are they being so coy about the technology behind the device? According to cnet, the company says:
"It's not as if we're using lots of processing power or some new hardware that just came on to the market," he said. "This is really about a fundamental scientific breakthrough, many Eureka moments that (Holz) stumbled through over four or five years of research."
So they want me to believe they came up with some magic algorithm, and not some new hardware tech? Because as far as I'm aware, the limitations in most sensors is hardware based, not software.
I see your anecdote and raise you my own, very similar one. Just came back from a conference today, the largest international conference in my field, robotics. Obviously, given the field, most people used Ubuntu or some other Linux distribution on their personal computers, which they used to project slides during their talks. It was pretty abysmal the number of machines that had trouble connecting to the projector, which ate considerably into the speaker's time. There were two instances where the speakers computer actually stopped responding as they switched back and forth between presentation and video. On one particular Ubuntu particular machine the presentation software wouldn't maximize fully, so the unity bar was there the whole time. On another, the resolution would adjust to the projectors, so the presentation didn't fill the screen.
So I say to you: what a fucking joke piece of shit software!
The only reason you think the start button is obvious and intuitive us because you've been using it for 17 years. Microsoft tried an office start button in 2007 and no one understood it was an actual clicks le button, since they e never seen it before. By removing the button, and instead using a hot corner, Microsoft made the interface MORE useful in my opinion. First, they removed a click, making a two step process into one. Then, they made the button infinite size for greater targetability according to fitts law. Once you discover how to use it, its a much better option.
Basically for about 4 months of every year I am working for the government and only for the government. For that period of time I am not benefiting from my own labor at all.
Not benefiting at all? Really? Ever drive on a road? Ever go to a public school? Ever go to the park? Ever use any of these technologies derived from government research? Where do you think the money comes from to pay for these things?
Hell, you obviously use the internet, which was made possible in a large part due to DARPA, along with other technologies you probably benefit from daily in your cushy first world life including RADAR, GPS, helicopters, jet engines, tanks, atomic power, and soon to be autonomous vehicles.
I listened to a This American Life episode recently where the town of Colorado Springs faced this reality when they voted against a tax increase, and government services like street lights and trash removal started shutting down.
Street lights wold go out, and people would call in to the government to fix it. They were basically told "We don't have the money to pay for that. Remember that tax increase you voted against last month? Yeah, that's why. If you'd like to send us a check for $100 we'd be happy to send someone out to fix it though."
Who exactly in the TFA is not using any government services? Police, fire, roads, military are services EVERYONE benefits from, no matter how "self sufficient" you claim to be. Even a mountain hermit benefits from the military, insofar as they guarantee foreign invaders won't just roll through his log cabin.
Wow, really? I had no idea. So then why are so many developers giving a 30% cut to Apple? Why don't they just host their app on their own site so I can download it there? More importantly, if that's the case then why isn't there Firefox or Google Chrome for iOS?
They restrict what they sell via their store. But you can install anything you want on the device
Considering that the store is the only way to install any software in iOS, how exactly do you install anything you like? Or are you talking about jailbreaking the device? If that's the case, what's to say that Windows RT won't have a similar "jailbreak" that allows you to install whatever software you want and use whatever APIs are available?
That's funny because there are many different browsers for... iOS.
No, there is only Safari for iOS, and clones thereof. This is the reasons there is no Chrome or Firefox on iOS. Opera is the only exception bcause it does all its webpage rendering on Opera servers, not the actual device. Windows 8 RT is actually more open than iOS in that respect, as you can install any metro browser you like.
Maybe this is the statistic law writer was referencing:
The mortality rate associated with anorexia nervosa is 12 times higher than the death rate associated with all causes of death for females 15-24 years old.
It's nice to see this happening just before the UEFI change-over as well to help ensure than Microsoft doesn't lock out other OS options,
Why so worried about this? Microsoft's own hardware certification process requires this is not the case on x86 systems. Page 116:
MANDATORY: On non-ARM systems, the platform MUST implement the ability for a physically present user to select between two Secure Boot modes in firmware setup: "Custom" and "Standard". Custom Mode allows for more flexibility as specified in the following:
a) It shall be possible for a physically present user to use the Custom Mode firmware setup option to modify the contents of the Secure Boot signature databases and the PK.
b) If the user ends up deleting the PK then, upon exiting the Custom Mode firmware setup, the system will be operating in Setup Mode with Secure Boot turned off.
c) The firmware setup shall indicate if Secure Boot is turned on, and if it is operated in Standard or Custom Mode. The firmware setup must provide an option to return from Custom to Standard Mode which restores the factory defaults.
Can you really get pissed off if you lose $50 in a venture?
I dunno, judging by some of the comment threads I've read on Kickstarter, there's a lot of talk about class action lawsuits on projects that seem to be going belly up. This talk is championed by people who "only" invested $50 or so, but it seems to be more of an issue of principle, or maybe just a lack of anything else going on in their lives.
Slashdot Mirror
Software maps to hardware, but hardware does not map to software. You can't code up a laser beam.
All three of those links are completely unrelated to computer vision systems in robotics. The first is a link to a picture taken with an AFM, the second is a very small camera with obviously terrible resolution (20x20px), and the third (posted below), is of another completely different instrument. And I guarantee you all three instruments cost tens of thousands of dollars.
Here's another number for how ridiculous the resolution claim is. They claim it works in a 8ft^3 volume... let's assume the 2D projection of this is a 2ftx2ft plane. This is equivalent to an area of 371612160000 microns^2. That's 300 billion microns^2, or 3x10^11 points of data. So we're talking about processing a point cloud on the order of hundreds of billions of points in real time over USB. How realistic is that? Let's assume they're using USB 3.0, with a theoretical maximum transmission speed of 5 Gbit/s. This means every second the sensor is able to send a maximum of 5x10^9 bits of data to the computer. If each point were only 1 bit (0/1), then the sensor would be able to deliver a full scan to the computer at .016 Hz. This means in the absolute best case scenario you'll get a full scan once every minute. With real world data transmission speeds and actual data (not just 0/1 bits) this update rate is going to suffer significantly. If we assume each measurement has double precision (that's 16 bits of data for every point in the cloud) the full point cloud comes out to 5.9x10^12 bits for transmission. That's an update rate of .0008 Hz at USB 3.0 theoretical maximum transfer speed, or a full scan every 1180 seconds (20 minutes).
This claim just doesn't hold up.
all entrants have to make clear up front what their contribution to their project was, how much help they had from others etc.
Yeah of course they have to. That's the way it was back when I was in the fair. But this is not what happens. My highschool had a very large science program and we sent about 90-100 kids a year to regional fairs. For some reason it was the kids who had researcher/professor/PhD/engineer parents who always made it to the international fair. After competing in these fairs year after year, you get to know the crowd, who's legit, and what kind of nonsense is going on.
If you really talk to these kids on a peer level (which you'll never be able to do at this point) you can see right through them. The judges are about the last people who have a grasp on the true character of some of these kids. I personally know a kid who completely faked his entire project year after year and never got caught. He was really good at faking work... probably was more effort than it would have taken to actually to the project. He won several high profile special awards from the military and armed forces for his "research."
It currently does not claim a specific resolution. Just the relative improvement values of 100x and 200x.
The link I posted above still contains the text which I also quoted above. It's still slashdotted but eventually came up. Here is the text of the full paragraph, emphasis mine:
Say goodbye to your mouse and keyboard.
Leap represents an entirely new way to interact with your computers. It’s more accurate than a mouse, as reliable as a keyboard and more sensitive than a touchscreen. For the first time, you can control a computer in three dimensions with your natural hand and finger movements.
This isn’t a game system that roughly maps your hand movements. The Leap technology is 200 times more accurate than anything else on the market — at any price point. Just about the size of a flash drive, the Leap can distinguish your individual fingers and track your movements down to a 1/100th of a millimeter.
This is like day one of the mouse. Except, no one needs an instruction manual for their hands.
More like the "best and the brightest" aren't necessarily any better and brighter than anyone else, but had certain resources that made their work more impressive.
I remember reading a slashdot news story about another teen science fair winner with some awesome result, but someone pointed out that he essentially copied someone else's PhD dissertation. Kinda made me skeptical about amazing science fair results. In this case, was he a chemical engineer? How did he even get access to pancreatic cancer urine samples?
I participated in ISEF from 7th grade until 12th, with varying levels of success. I did very well, but never as well as this kid, but I dated a girl for 4 years who basically won the same place. This competition is very high stakes, as the winners basically get to choose their school from the top schools in the country. I attribute my acceptance into CMU more to ISEF than anything else I did in Highschool.
With such high stakes, there is a lot of parental support, especially from parents who are scientists and engineers. A friend of mine had unlimited access through her family to a MRI machine. She did very well and went on to MIT. Another friend had access to vast quantities of microbial data through her mom. Other people had their parents design and supervise the experiments, while others still performed extensive and impressive statistical tests well beyond the skill of a 14 year old, thanks to their parents. After dating my girlfriend for some time, who again placed as well as the kid in the story, she revealed to me her father basically did all the work.
None of this is ever disclosed at the fair, and all work is always presented by the students to be their own original research. I'm not saying the kids in question were dumb... quite the opposite they were brilliant. But they also had a great deal of extra help from highly educated people to "guide" their research. I'm also not saying this was the case for the winner this year, but it wouldn't surprise me if it was.
Just about the size of a flash drive, the Leap can distinguish your individual fingers and track your movements down to a 1/100th of a millimeter.
AKA 10 microns. A human hair is about 100 microns. 10 microns is more along the size of a grain of pollen.
see what (amateur) robots can do these days merely on "sight".
Sorry, even the best applications of vision in robotics at the top universities and companies in the world are not this accurate. A sensor as accurate as they're claiming should be able to measure the height of a grain of salt sitting on a table top.
I don't think so, since they talk about chaining several of these together to increase the effective workspace. If they're bouncing signals all over the place, there would be an unmanageable amount of crosstalk between sensors.
I'm having huge difficulty understanding how this is getting rolled out for video gaming instead of manufacturing.
Yes! This is something I was also thinking. This kind of technology would be great in medicine, manufacturing, various industrial applications, robotics, retail... they could have complete domination over various sectors worth billions. Yet they're shooting for consumer electronics? Seriously?
FOV is 57 horizontally and 43, with a maximum range of about 20 ft. I don't know how much volume that is, but it's significantly larger than 8 cubic feet.
I agree... they're releasing absolutely zero tangible information about the product while accepting pre-orders and developer applications. Seems like they want to bring their investors some numbers on how many people are interested. It remains to be seen if this $70 price is even realistic... and for that matter exactly what kind of technology this actually is.
I'm having trouble understanding exactly what kinds of technology this device is using to obtain accuracy on the level of 10 micrometers for $70. On the website they only state:
Leap Motion technology is a breakthrough in computer interaction, using a patented mathematical approach to 3D, touch-free motion sensing and motion control software that’s unlike anything that currently exists on the market or in academia. Developed over the past 4 years, Leap Motion moves far beyond the current technologies designed for distant arm waving.
But that say a whole lot of nothing... Why are they being so coy about the technology behind the device? According to cnet, the company says:
"It's not as if we're using lots of processing power or some new hardware that just came on to the market," he said. "This is really about a fundamental scientific breakthrough, many Eureka moments that (Holz) stumbled through over four or five years of research."
So they want me to believe they came up with some magic algorithm, and not some new hardware tech? Because as far as I'm aware, the limitations in most sensors is hardware based, not software.
I see your anecdote and raise you my own, very similar one. Just came back from a conference today, the largest international conference in my field, robotics. Obviously, given the field, most people used Ubuntu or some other Linux distribution on their personal computers, which they used to project slides during their talks. It was pretty abysmal the number of machines that had trouble connecting to the projector, which ate considerably into the speaker's time. There were two instances where the speakers computer actually stopped responding as they switched back and forth between presentation and video. On one particular Ubuntu particular machine the presentation software wouldn't maximize fully, so the unity bar was there the whole time. On another, the resolution would adjust to the projectors, so the presentation didn't fill the screen.
So I say to you: what a fucking joke piece of shit software!
The only reason you think the start button is obvious and intuitive us because you've been using it for 17 years. Microsoft tried an office start button in 2007 and no one understood it was an actual clicks le button, since they e never seen it before. By removing the button, and instead using a hot corner, Microsoft made the interface MORE useful in my opinion. First, they removed a click, making a two step process into one. Then, they made the button infinite size for greater targetability according to fitts law. Once you discover how to use it, its a much better option.
Basically for about 4 months of every year I am working for the government and only for the government. For that period of time I am not benefiting from my own labor at all.
Not benefiting at all? Really? Ever drive on a road? Ever go to a public school? Ever go to the park? Ever use any of these technologies derived from government research? Where do you think the money comes from to pay for these things?
Hell, you obviously use the internet, which was made possible in a large part due to DARPA, along with other technologies you probably benefit from daily in your cushy first world life including RADAR, GPS, helicopters, jet engines, tanks, atomic power, and soon to be autonomous vehicles.
I listened to a This American Life episode recently where the town of Colorado Springs faced this reality when they voted against a tax increase, and government services like street lights and trash removal started shutting down.
Street lights wold go out, and people would call in to the government to fix it. They were basically told "We don't have the money to pay for that. Remember that tax increase you voted against last month? Yeah, that's why. If you'd like to send us a check for $100 we'd be happy to send someone out to fix it though."
Who exactly in the TFA is not using any government services? Police, fire, roads, military are services EVERYONE benefits from, no matter how "self sufficient" you claim to be. Even a mountain hermit benefits from the military, insofar as they guarantee foreign invaders won't just roll through his log cabin.
Wow, really? I had no idea. So then why are so many developers giving a 30% cut to Apple? Why don't they just host their app on their own site so I can download it there? More importantly, if that's the case then why isn't there Firefox or Google Chrome for iOS?
They restrict what they sell via their store. But you can install anything you want on the device
Considering that the store is the only way to install any software in iOS, how exactly do you install anything you like? Or are you talking about jailbreaking the device? If that's the case, what's to say that Windows RT won't have a similar "jailbreak" that allows you to install whatever software you want and use whatever APIs are available?
That's funny because there are many different browsers for ... iOS.
No, there is only Safari for iOS, and clones thereof. This is the reasons there is no Chrome or Firefox on iOS. Opera is the only exception bcause it does all its webpage rendering on Opera servers, not the actual device. Windows 8 RT is actually more open than iOS in that respect, as you can install any metro browser you like.
The mortality rate associated with anorexia nervosa is 12 times higher than the death rate associated with all causes of death for females 15-24 years old.
Source: http://www.anad.org/get-information/about-eating-disorders/eating-disorders-statistics/
Citation: American Journal of Psychiatry, Vol. 152 (7), July 1995, p. 1073-1074, Sullivan, Patrick F.
It's nice to see this happening just before the UEFI change-over as well to help ensure than Microsoft doesn't lock out other OS options,
Why so worried about this? Microsoft's own hardware certification process requires this is not the case on x86 systems. Page 116:
MANDATORY: On non-ARM systems, the platform MUST implement the ability for a physically present user to select between two Secure Boot modes in firmware setup: "Custom" and "Standard". Custom Mode allows for more flexibility as specified in the following:
a) It shall be possible for a physically present user to use the Custom Mode firmware setup option to modify the contents of the Secure Boot signature databases and the PK.
b) If the user ends up deleting the PK then, upon exiting the Custom Mode firmware setup, the system will be operating in Setup Mode with Secure Boot turned off.
c) The firmware setup shall indicate if Secure Boot is turned on, and if it is operated in Standard or Custom Mode. The firmware setup must provide an option to return from Custom to Standard Mode which restores the factory defaults.
Can you really get pissed off if you lose $50 in a venture?
I dunno, judging by some of the comment threads I've read on Kickstarter, there's a lot of talk about class action lawsuits on projects that seem to be going belly up. This talk is championed by people who "only" invested $50 or so, but it seems to be more of an issue of principle, or maybe just a lack of anything else going on in their lives.