"Once your hearing is damaged, it is not recoverable"
Isn't the whole point of the article to show us that that statement is wrong?
This is what regenerative medicine is all about. A decade or two from now, you'll see that a lot of the problems we face now with "irreversible" damage to the body and loss of tissue, will be treatable and made reversible by regenerative medicine. That includes damaged ears, ligaments, bones, skin, and a bunch of other tissues and organs.
Who never had LP's and good sound systems back in the day, don't realise how much CD's took away sound fidelity with it's 16 bit 44khz digital encodings. It's about time someone made a push towards increasing quality. Specially now that storage space is so cheap.
First of all, what may be expensive now, could be much cheaper than actually raising chickens in a few decades. It's just a matter of perfecting the methods of mass production.
Second of all, you missed the whole point of making artificial chickens, which is to avoid cruelty. 99% of the chickens consumed in the world are not happy chickens that roam around free in their pens, but rather they're raised their entire lives in little cubicles. This type of cruelty will no longer be needed if we're able to just grow their meat.
You can't compare the Glyph, who lets you watch a screen floating in front of you, with the 110 FOV Rift, who places you virtually inside the content. Positional tracking in not that important if all you'll be doing is turning around this or that way, while seated at a chair. Can you imagine having a 360 3D live video being broadcast from a court seat in an NBA game, or a tennis or football match, with all the notions of scale and depth you get with real 3D? This will be a huge thing with sports and other content that benefits from the sense of presence you'll get.
Here's a link showing some people who are developing tech to stream live VR sports:
Re:In the early 90s we all read the hype
on
The Road To VR
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
And your point is? Are you saying that because it didn't become a success in the 90's it is a failed concept?
The card I have in my computer now, is many times more powerful than an $250k Silicon Graphics Onyx that you had back then. The displays you had back then were crap and had very low resolution. The latency you had in tracking was nauseating and full of errors. Not to mention the huge weight of the "helmet".
Compare that to:
- 1920x1080 resolution OLED with low persistency
- Low latency 1:1 positional tracking
- ~20ms motion to photon latency
- High end PC GPU's capable of rendering realistic graphics at real time >60fps
- ~200 grams of weight and comfortable as the average ski goggles
- $300 price tag
It is so tiresome hearing people who never tried the Rift say it's hype and a gimmick based on 20 year old attempts at the technology.
For a long time I wondered what led people to leave gratuitously mean comments on Internet forums and bait people into getting into arguments for the fun of it. I always imagined that the Internet, due to it's protection of anonymity, just brought out all the negative aspects personalities (described in the article) that on regular social occasions they would never have the courage to display. The sad thing is, how big the number people like that is.
"Most of the problem is artistic, not technological."
That's the whole problem, and what people are trying to fix.
As long as games need to rely on expensive and talented artists or expensive motion capture to do human character animation, the production costs of games will continue to go up and up as games get more realistic, not to mention the all the limitations imposed by such methods.
It's only when algorithms and software are fully able to imitate in a realistic the way humans look and move, that we will be able to see a significant drop in productions costs and a gigantic leap in gameplay and interaction potential with human characters in games.
Not sure why I bother replying such an "enlightened" human being such as you, but here it goes anyway.
As someone who works in software development, and needs to constantly switch tabs to find different parts of the code, not to mention keep multiple internet browser tabs open, having 2 or 3 monitors is a must. In a virtual environment, you not only have the ability to dynamically create multiple monitors of varying sizes, but you also have the ability to share that virtual space with other remote developers. Collaborative or pair programming, demonstrations, sprint meetings using a shared virtual space would permit a much more natural and efficient way of being done, in comparison with todays online sharing platforms.
But what would I know? I'm an idiot.
Virtual desktops will be amazing for work and remote collaboration. The problem is, we probably won't see anything like that in the first version due to the low resolution. We would need at least 4K in order to allow decent readable texts in a virtual desktop.
Maybe 3 or 4 years from now. I'm sure it will be a killer application, having dozens of floating monitors of various sizes for you to work with.
The work he's doing in Oculus must be 10x more exiting then building the next graphics engine for the next Doom or whatever. VR will be the next paradigm shift in gaming, such as 3D was once in the 90's. He was the pioneer in 3D FPS gaming then, now he will be the pioneer along with the guys from Oculus VR in the next evolution. I expect great things to come!
Just because something is not a sentient general intelligence or something related to higher thinking, doesn't mean it's not AI. This algorithm works much of the same way we do when trying to identify visual patterns. It uses much more finesse and way less computing power than some of the previous attempts to do the same thing. To say that this is not an advancement in AI is wrong. This whole assumption that the same modules responsible for the higher level thinking needs to responsible for all the other aspects related to vision and other sensory inputs makes no sense. The same way our brain has the somatosensory cortex doing most of the input processing for us, future AI's will have auxiliary systems providing their visual, auditory and haptic processing for them. This is a technology that can and probably will be applied to robots and other autonomous systems in the near future.
Slashdot Mirror
"Once your hearing is damaged, it is not recoverable"
Isn't the whole point of the article to show us that that statement is wrong?
This is what regenerative medicine is all about. A decade or two from now, you'll see that a lot of the problems we face now with "irreversible" damage to the body and loss of tissue, will be treatable and made reversible by regenerative medicine. That includes damaged ears, ligaments, bones, skin, and a bunch of other tissues and organs.
Would be invaluable!
Apple researchers develop new finger swapping technology for the next iOS!
Who never had LP's and good sound systems back in the day, don't realise how much CD's took away sound fidelity with it's 16 bit 44khz digital encodings. It's about time someone made a push towards increasing quality. Specially now that storage space is so cheap.
First of all, what may be expensive now, could be much cheaper than actually raising chickens in a few decades. It's just a matter of perfecting the methods of mass production. Second of all, you missed the whole point of making artificial chickens, which is to avoid cruelty. 99% of the chickens consumed in the world are not happy chickens that roam around free in their pens, but rather they're raised their entire lives in little cubicles. This type of cruelty will no longer be needed if we're able to just grow their meat.
You can't compare the Glyph, who lets you watch a screen floating in front of you, with the 110 FOV Rift, who places you virtually inside the content. Positional tracking in not that important if all you'll be doing is turning around this or that way, while seated at a chair. Can you imagine having a 360 3D live video being broadcast from a court seat in an NBA game, or a tennis or football match, with all the notions of scale and depth you get with real 3D? This will be a huge thing with sports and other content that benefits from the sense of presence you'll get.
Here's a link showing some people who are developing tech to stream live VR sports :
http://www.roadtovr.com/ces-20...
Between 50k-55k dev kits sold, actually.
And your point is? Are you saying that because it didn't become a success in the 90's it is a failed concept?
The card I have in my computer now, is many times more powerful than an $250k Silicon Graphics Onyx that you had back then. The displays you had back then were crap and had very low resolution. The latency you had in tracking was nauseating and full of errors. Not to mention the huge weight of the "helmet".
Compare that to:
- 1920x1080 resolution OLED with low persistency
- Low latency 1:1 positional tracking
- ~20ms motion to photon latency
- High end PC GPU's capable of rendering realistic graphics at real time >60fps
- ~200 grams of weight and comfortable as the average ski goggles
- $300 price tag
It is so tiresome hearing people who never tried the Rift say it's hype and a gimmick based on 20 year old attempts at the technology.
For a long time I wondered what led people to leave gratuitously mean comments on Internet forums and bait people into getting into arguments for the fun of it. I always imagined that the Internet, due to it's protection of anonymity, just brought out all the negative aspects personalities (described in the article) that on regular social occasions they would never have the courage to display. The sad thing is, how big the number people like that is.
"Most of the problem is artistic, not technological."
That's the whole problem, and what people are trying to fix.
As long as games need to rely on expensive and talented artists or expensive motion capture to do human character animation, the production costs of games will continue to go up and up as games get more realistic, not to mention the all the limitations imposed by such methods. It's only when algorithms and software are fully able to imitate in a realistic the way humans look and move, that we will be able to see a significant drop in productions costs and a gigantic leap in gameplay and interaction potential with human characters in games.
Not sure why I bother replying such an "enlightened" human being such as you, but here it goes anyway. As someone who works in software development, and needs to constantly switch tabs to find different parts of the code, not to mention keep multiple internet browser tabs open, having 2 or 3 monitors is a must. In a virtual environment, you not only have the ability to dynamically create multiple monitors of varying sizes, but you also have the ability to share that virtual space with other remote developers. Collaborative or pair programming, demonstrations, sprint meetings using a shared virtual space would permit a much more natural and efficient way of being done, in comparison with todays online sharing platforms. But what would I know? I'm an idiot.
Virtual desktops will be amazing for work and remote collaboration. The problem is, we probably won't see anything like that in the first version due to the low resolution. We would need at least 4K in order to allow decent readable texts in a virtual desktop. Maybe 3 or 4 years from now. I'm sure it will be a killer application, having dozens of floating monitors of various sizes for you to work with.
10x more exiting ~~then~~ than building the next graphics engine
Sieg Heil!
Bah! RL is totally P2W!
The work he's doing in Oculus must be 10x more exiting then building the next graphics engine for the next Doom or whatever. VR will be the next paradigm shift in gaming, such as 3D was once in the 90's. He was the pioneer in 3D FPS gaming then, now he will be the pioneer along with the guys from Oculus VR in the next evolution. I expect great things to come!
Yes, their chief weapon is surprise.
now that would be world changing!
Hard drives talking flight? What will scientists invent next?!
...to Cell processors.
8K resolution, 120hz. Nuff said.
to make a Dracula joke. It would just be too easy.
I can just imagine someone screaming that and suddenly all the programmers running out of their cubicles in panic!
Just because something is not a sentient general intelligence or something related to higher thinking, doesn't mean it's not AI. This algorithm works much of the same way we do when trying to identify visual patterns. It uses much more finesse and way less computing power than some of the previous attempts to do the same thing. To say that this is not an advancement in AI is wrong. This whole assumption that the same modules responsible for the higher level thinking needs to responsible for all the other aspects related to vision and other sensory inputs makes no sense. The same way our brain has the somatosensory cortex doing most of the input processing for us, future AI's will have auxiliary systems providing their visual, auditory and haptic processing for them. This is a technology that can and probably will be applied to robots and other autonomous systems in the near future.
...can't come soon enough. We desperately need a change in paradigm. Hopefully we might have something around 2020. *crossing fingers*
Yep. It's all downhill from here, as planets starts to vanish.