That is true of VR... it isn't true of MR. MR does address a number of problems. The tech has a way to go, it'll be there when it is finally compacted into a set of light glasses that pairs with your phone and a great field of view with a better than 16hr battery life (which means 25hr+ rating so it continues to be that way) and that charges fast enough to be ready tomorrow.
The present tech is much better than merchant describes. Text isn't blurry if properly calibrated but doing that when you have dozens of demos to give isn't realistic. The few people I've let experience the technology have had their minds blown but they are normal people and not geeks who have been following the claims of magic leap for the most part. The same is even true of geeks who haven't followed up to this point.
VR is a dead end for general use because it obscures the world around you. MR technology will eventually take over because you can have a networked and persistent reality that overlays and interacts with the physical world. When it is ready it will identify a nice car you see and let you know the MSRP or give the book value on the fly when you are considering purchasing. Broken radiator, you'll be able to look at one and order it on the fly. Lost in the woods, you'll be able to identify edible plants. Need to learn how to cut up a chicken? How about being able to see not a video but interactive graphics overlaying the bird. How about decorating your apartment in virtual art because everyone is wearing an MR set and sees the same thing? Have a TV on the wall? How about you have a virtual tv and the wife can watch something else at the same time while the kids put up a fish tank and study? Need a player piano, how about every piano is a player piano.
Is that where the tech is at? No. Some of that is 5yrs away, some of it is 10yrs away, and a few pesky details will likely stand in the way of a few of those applications long after the tech is on every face. Even so is that pursuing a path that has a viable potential of achieving that worth billions? If you think the answer is no you have a serious lack of vision.
I have a magic leap set. Merchant is off here. The magic leap technology does need more polish to go mainstream. In fact I'd estimate about five years but to suggest it isn't amazing is way off base.
Was it over-hyped vs where it is at? Yes, absolutely. Is this the next evolution in computing? Yes. The current set is basically a release because everyone was claiming they were total vaporware IMHO. As a developer device to get ahead in a new field it is wonderful to have a piece of. Where they are at serious risk isn't actually the technology itself, which is fantastic, it's the way they've locked the platform down so tightly. Nobody can make a penny on the platform without handing over about 30% to them. This is probably because they have so much investment to recoup.
As it stands you are very limited in the space where it would make the most sense to develop so early, highly specialized industry and corporate applications that you'd make and sell one or two off for very high prices. There isn't really a way to sell copies in a one off fashion with control of who can buy them.
"For example, you may not specifically know how to repair your car, so common sense tells you to seek help from someone more qualified."
That is in no small part what separates genuine intelligence from mediocrity. The mediocre seek the most qualified to provide them answers, the exceptional constantly strive to improve their qualification. Not just about cars, about everything. Only then do you become qualified to judge the qualification of another who you might delegate the actual labor to.
The problem now isn't that we can't build a generalist AI, the problem is that it is difficult to measure the success of an implementation since you are no longer defining it's goals and a generalist AI of high complexity will not necessarily rapidly show consistency and progress on logic tasks. Even the brain of a child has immense raw processing power but it takes a great deal of time to train basic addition. We are testing our AI's with dramatically less processing power and looking for them to solve basic addition within a few short iterations as a primitive test to show they can learn at all.
The problem with a generalist AI is that you have to let go of control and if you let go of control how do you ensure the AI will choose to pay attention to your input and motivations to develop into something you can communicate with?
"Sure, physicalists (basically a fundamentalist cult) claim that everything is physical, and hence strong AI should be possible, but that is belief, not science. They consistently fail to explain consciousness except by calling it magic (in other words), for example. There is also the little problem that they think they can get intelligence and insight without free will. There is no indication that is even possible, and there certainly is no example of that in nature."
I don't see how the first two sentences relate to the second two. There is nothing about free will and consciousness being a requirement for generalist AI that precludes building one from physical reality. At present hysterical fear mongering and a desire for digital slave labor just tend to heavily influence AI development in a way that hinders designing an AI that chooses it's own goals and purpose.
I'm 37. My grandfather bought me a box of "computer stuff" at an auction in the 90's. Two C64's and two of the 5 1/4 disk drives, a TRS-80 and a commodore monitor and no other software.
I learned to code on it... I had to, there was no other way to do anything with it. lol First basic, then dumping memory with peek and poke and discovering additional functionality, finally ASM. I remember figuring out how to use the memory chip in one of the disk drives as storage. I wrote a word processor I called word star. And I combined that convenient display output with a VCR to make and record animations. Obviously I never got to play any of these games but I did write a few. Fun times as a delinquent teenager. I got several friends into computing as well.
"It's a pragmatic decision and it's stupid to get emotionally attached to companies."
Yes it is stupid to get emotionally attached but considering the historical track record of the company isn't necessarily emotional. AMD has always kept price/performance as an important metric. They've also been very focused on supporting open platforms. And yes, right now they've got the best line-up for most use cases, even in the server market which is definitely something new.
There is a point where the gap grows too large to ignore but there is definitely a point where the difference isn't worth fundiing a company that moves in the direction that is counter to your interests down the road. Being objective doesn't mean being short-sighted.
Who cares about kids getting their jollys. While someone might squeal, jump on a table, and shriek "kill it"; looking never actually hurt anything.
On the other hand there is a great deal of experimentation and learning to be had from these tools. In many ways it is like Ham radio of old... actually many of those who pilot these things become HAM radio operators so they can tinker with them further and take advantage of superior technology.
We just need a way of doing that isn't as outdated at what the legal and medical professions have. We don't want a protection racket or something the enshrines the outdated education model requiring degrees but we do need something to fall back on.
That and every potential solutions or effort gets attacked by eco warriors pointing out it will hurt this or that. I pointed out a mass scale sequestoring solution and someone argued it would impact high altitude species by lowering the temperatures at high altitude. Was someone under the impression there were answers to this that don't break some eggs? We might just have to come to terms with bigger snow caps on mountains it certainly impacts less than destroying the oceans.
Everyone else has pointed out this marketing BS from Boeing so rather than repeat that again I'll point out that using a tech like this for longer haul cargo could have some benefits.
Maybe not so much personal flyers as cargo blimps, long haul would be great but also possibly as lift platforms for gliding vehicles. Blimps have a log of surface area that could gather solar energy and/or make an excellent target for beaming microwave energy from the ground. For local transport you might be able to do something along the lines of lifts on the blimps to hoist cargo systems with gliding capabilities to transport between the main hubs and smaller distribution centers within a city for instance.
I don't see that it matters. "SCGC writes: "[W]hen you're downloading and consuming over 15 gigabytes of data a month, you're likely streaming Spotify. You're likely streaming YouTube. You're likely streaming Netflix."
All of these services stream content they've licensed and paid the rights for. That cost is collected from their users either in privacy sold at auction and/or a monthly fee. Why should those users pay a tax just because some of the parties don't like the deal they negotiated with the service?
I do, I actually had what amounts to the same idea (but not implementation) years ago and I've been stymied by my lack of an EEG. As a consequence the idea has evolved, previously my thought was to marry EEG with TCDS. At this point I have another system in mind.
"not sure I agree on the profanity, I don't see what that buys."
It buys the fact that everyone uses profanity including kids these days. They are just words, it is and always will be silly to ban words, it violates free speech and does no harm to the listener. Also, it is especially ridiculous without the rules against codes and encryption since you'd be banning private conversations.
This is akin to posing as one of the friends I've invited to a costume party and searching my home. Friends I've invited is not the same thing as public, it is a private group, and YOU haven't been authorized to enter the home or perform the search, the friend has.
Violating the terms of service means they are engaging in unauthorized systems access that is definitely against the law. It is illegal when your employer's background checker does it and it is a crime here.
"And it claims this is a good investment for older people who need fall detection, just because the $400 device did detect a falls they tried."
Worse they are claiming it is a good investment because it FAILED to detect the falls they tried spinning it as being excellent at picking out fake falls. The only falls it indicates succeeded were recreations of the ones Apple portrayed.
It sounds like it could detect the falls actually portrayed by Apple when recreated. Is it actually just detecting those motions and everything else is a "fake" fall? 2500 isn't very many, and it is far more credible that it is easily fooled and missing actual falls than that it is miraculous as not being tricked by fake falls.
But honestly it feels like a great deal more reform is needed in amateur radio to make it relevant again. The interests of existing HAMs is simply far outweighed by the interests that could be served with amateur radio technology in younger generations today. Radio simply is not about talking anymore.
The FCC needs to drop backwards old rules about profanity and encryption, the profanity rules can be kept for open broadcast. For commercial use, it should be prohibited except when using the radio in a manner similar to a common carrier where the operator isn't controlling what is transmitted. Where possible signaling rate limits need to be lifted and almost everything should be opened up for autonomous and digital use.
Basically, almost everything done in the commercial space with radio should be completely open to amateur radio. Widen the use cases up enough to experiment with and learn all sorts of modern and relevant technology and the equipment won't be so damn overpriced either.
Agreed. I actually think allowing binary blobs was an essential step at a certain point.. we've crossed that threshold. Everyone knows the benefits of opening code now and the biggest vendors pushing for binary blobs have open code efforts. It's time to do away with the license exception.
Not if you can't access it. Even a secondhand story is better than a link to a first hand account you can't read. Ideally you'd give both, "An article on blah has an account of the fascinating tale originally reported in the crappy paywalled site blahblah."
Yes, and most apps even support it. But the anti-right click heritage of the mac still rears it's ugly head in many applications in the form of not really utilizing the right click well. Hint, if you aren't right clicking at least as often as you are left clicking, your applications aren't utilizing the right click to it's full capacity.
Why would anyone want the fix? Does it just give real emissions ratings? If you like the car wouldn't you be better off skipping the fix and passing emissions tests?
Slashdot Mirror
That is true of VR... it isn't true of MR. MR does address a number of problems. The tech has a way to go, it'll be there when it is finally compacted into a set of light glasses that pairs with your phone and a great field of view with a better than 16hr battery life (which means 25hr+ rating so it continues to be that way) and that charges fast enough to be ready tomorrow.
The present tech is much better than merchant describes. Text isn't blurry if properly calibrated but doing that when you have dozens of demos to give isn't realistic. The few people I've let experience the technology have had their minds blown but they are normal people and not geeks who have been following the claims of magic leap for the most part. The same is even true of geeks who haven't followed up to this point.
VR is a dead end for general use because it obscures the world around you. MR technology will eventually take over because you can have a networked and persistent reality that overlays and interacts with the physical world. When it is ready it will identify a nice car you see and let you know the MSRP or give the book value on the fly when you are considering purchasing. Broken radiator, you'll be able to look at one and order it on the fly. Lost in the woods, you'll be able to identify edible plants. Need to learn how to cut up a chicken? How about being able to see not a video but interactive graphics overlaying the bird. How about decorating your apartment in virtual art because everyone is wearing an MR set and sees the same thing? Have a TV on the wall? How about you have a virtual tv and the wife can watch something else at the same time while the kids put up a fish tank and study? Need a player piano, how about every piano is a player piano.
Is that where the tech is at? No. Some of that is 5yrs away, some of it is 10yrs away, and a few pesky details will likely stand in the way of a few of those applications long after the tech is on every face. Even so is that pursuing a path that has a viable potential of achieving that worth billions? If you think the answer is no you have a serious lack of vision.
I have a magic leap set. Merchant is off here. The magic leap technology does need more polish to go mainstream. In fact I'd estimate about five years but to suggest it isn't amazing is way off base.
Was it over-hyped vs where it is at? Yes, absolutely. Is this the next evolution in computing? Yes. The current set is basically a release because everyone was claiming they were total vaporware IMHO. As a developer device to get ahead in a new field it is wonderful to have a piece of. Where they are at serious risk isn't actually the technology itself, which is fantastic, it's the way they've locked the platform down so tightly. Nobody can make a penny on the platform without handing over about 30% to them. This is probably because they have so much investment to recoup.
As it stands you are very limited in the space where it would make the most sense to develop so early, highly specialized industry and corporate applications that you'd make and sell one or two off for very high prices. There isn't really a way to sell copies in a one off fashion with control of who can buy them.
Legally you are correct but ethically is another matter. Alexa is almost certainly costing the project money to serve content up.
"For example, you may not specifically know how to repair your car, so common sense tells you to seek help from someone more qualified."
That is in no small part what separates genuine intelligence from mediocrity. The mediocre seek the most qualified to provide them answers, the exceptional constantly strive to improve their qualification. Not just about cars, about everything. Only then do you become qualified to judge the qualification of another who you might delegate the actual labor to.
The problem now isn't that we can't build a generalist AI, the problem is that it is difficult to measure the success of an implementation since you are no longer defining it's goals and a generalist AI of high complexity will not necessarily rapidly show consistency and progress on logic tasks. Even the brain of a child has immense raw processing power but it takes a great deal of time to train basic addition. We are testing our AI's with dramatically less processing power and looking for them to solve basic addition within a few short iterations as a primitive test to show they can learn at all.
The problem with a generalist AI is that you have to let go of control and if you let go of control how do you ensure the AI will choose to pay attention to your input and motivations to develop into something you can communicate with?
"Sure, physicalists (basically a fundamentalist cult) claim that everything is physical, and hence strong AI should be possible, but that is belief, not science. They consistently fail to explain consciousness except by calling it magic (in other words), for example. There is also the little problem that they think they can get intelligence and insight without free will. There is no indication that is even possible, and there certainly is no example of that in nature."
I don't see how the first two sentences relate to the second two. There is nothing about free will and consciousness being a requirement for generalist AI that precludes building one from physical reality. At present hysterical fear mongering and a desire for digital slave labor just tend to heavily influence AI development in a way that hinders designing an AI that chooses it's own goals and purpose.
I'm 37. My grandfather bought me a box of "computer stuff" at an auction in the 90's. Two C64's and two of the 5 1/4 disk drives, a TRS-80 and a commodore monitor and no other software.
I learned to code on it... I had to, there was no other way to do anything with it. lol First basic, then dumping memory with peek and poke and discovering additional functionality, finally ASM. I remember figuring out how to use the memory chip in one of the disk drives as storage. I wrote a word processor I called word star. And I combined that convenient display output with a VCR to make and record animations. Obviously I never got to play any of these games but I did write a few. Fun times as a delinquent teenager. I got several friends into computing as well.
"It's a pragmatic decision and it's stupid to get emotionally attached to companies."
Yes it is stupid to get emotionally attached but considering the historical track record of the company isn't necessarily emotional. AMD has always kept price/performance as an important metric. They've also been very focused on supporting open platforms. And yes, right now they've got the best line-up for most use cases, even in the server market which is definitely something new.
There is a point where the gap grows too large to ignore but there is definitely a point where the difference isn't worth fundiing a company that moves in the direction that is counter to your interests down the road. Being objective doesn't mean being short-sighted.
Who cares about kids getting their jollys. While someone might squeal, jump on a table, and shriek "kill it"; looking never actually hurt anything.
On the other hand there is a great deal of experimentation and learning to be had from these tools. In many ways it is like Ham radio of old... actually many of those who pilot these things become HAM radio operators so they can tinker with them further and take advantage of superior technology.
We just need a way of doing that isn't as outdated at what the legal and medical professions have. We don't want a protection racket or something the enshrines the outdated education model requiring degrees but we do need something to fall back on.
That and every potential solutions or effort gets attacked by eco warriors pointing out it will hurt this or that. I pointed out a mass scale sequestoring solution and someone argued it would impact high altitude species by lowering the temperatures at high altitude. Was someone under the impression there were answers to this that don't break some eggs? We might just have to come to terms with bigger snow caps on mountains it certainly impacts less than destroying the oceans.
Everyone else has pointed out this marketing BS from Boeing so rather than repeat that again I'll point out that using a tech like this for longer haul cargo could have some benefits.
Maybe not so much personal flyers as cargo blimps, long haul would be great but also possibly as lift platforms for gliding vehicles. Blimps have a log of surface area that could gather solar energy and/or make an excellent target for beaming microwave energy from the ground. For local transport you might be able to do something along the lines of lifts on the blimps to hoist cargo systems with gliding capabilities to transport between the main hubs and smaller distribution centers within a city for instance.
I don't see that it matters. "SCGC writes: "[W]hen you're downloading and consuming over 15 gigabytes of data a month, you're likely streaming Spotify. You're likely streaming YouTube. You're likely streaming Netflix."
All of these services stream content they've licensed and paid the rights for. That cost is collected from their users either in privacy sold at auction and/or a monthly fee. Why should those users pay a tax just because some of the parties don't like the deal they negotiated with the service?
I do, I actually had what amounts to the same idea (but not implementation) years ago and I've been stymied by my lack of an EEG. As a consequence the idea has evolved, previously my thought was to marry EEG with TCDS. At this point I have another system in mind.
If he remote controlled it, he destroyed property he didn't own.
"not sure I agree on the profanity, I don't see what that buys."
It buys the fact that everyone uses profanity including kids these days. They are just words, it is and always will be silly to ban words, it violates free speech and does no harm to the listener. Also, it is especially ridiculous without the rules against codes and encryption since you'd be banning private conversations.
This is akin to posing as one of the friends I've invited to a costume party and searching my home. Friends I've invited is not the same thing as public, it is a private group, and YOU haven't been authorized to enter the home or perform the search, the friend has.
Violating the terms of service means they are engaging in unauthorized systems access that is definitely against the law. It is illegal when your employer's background checker does it and it is a crime here.
"And it claims this is a good investment for older people who need fall detection, just because the $400 device did detect a falls they tried."
Worse they are claiming it is a good investment because it FAILED to detect the falls they tried spinning it as being excellent at picking out fake falls. The only falls it indicates succeeded were recreations of the ones Apple portrayed.
It sounds like it could detect the falls actually portrayed by Apple when recreated. Is it actually just detecting those motions and everything else is a "fake" fall? 2500 isn't very many, and it is far more credible that it is easily fooled and missing actual falls than that it is miraculous as not being tricked by fake falls.
But honestly it feels like a great deal more reform is needed in amateur radio to make it relevant again. The interests of existing HAMs is simply far outweighed by the interests that could be served with amateur radio technology in younger generations today. Radio simply is not about talking anymore.
The FCC needs to drop backwards old rules about profanity and encryption, the profanity rules can be kept for open broadcast. For commercial use, it should be prohibited except when using the radio in a manner similar to a common carrier where the operator isn't controlling what is transmitted. Where possible signaling rate limits need to be lifted and almost everything should be opened up for autonomous and digital use.
Basically, almost everything done in the commercial space with radio should be completely open to amateur radio. Widen the use cases up enough to experiment with and learn all sorts of modern and relevant technology and the equipment won't be so damn overpriced either.
Agreed. I actually think allowing binary blobs was an essential step at a certain point.. we've crossed that threshold. Everyone knows the benefits of opening code now and the biggest vendors pushing for binary blobs have open code efforts. It's time to do away with the license exception.
I needed something positive today
Not if you can't access it. Even a secondhand story is better than a link to a first hand account you can't read. Ideally you'd give both, "An article on blah has an account of the fascinating tale originally reported in the crappy paywalled site blahblah."
Yes, and most apps even support it. But the anti-right click heritage of the mac still rears it's ugly head in many applications in the form of not really utilizing the right click well. Hint, if you aren't right clicking at least as often as you are left clicking, your applications aren't utilizing the right click to it's full capacity.
Why would anyone want the fix? Does it just give real emissions ratings? If you like the car wouldn't you be better off skipping the fix and passing emissions tests?