One could argue that some sort of unviersal remote control would be more smaller, cheaper, etc, and nearly effective. The advantage of the Canadian device is that it is something to be incorporated into the appliance without requiring any extra hardware on the user's end, while MIT's requires the user to be wearing the Eye aRe. Given that it's a technology which is supposed to allow greater integration of other technology into our lives through promoting a somewhat more passive control scheme, the requirement to wear a pair of funny looking glasses to get my TV to work is not all that attractive. Imagine you've brought a date back to your place and you want to impress her with your ability to turn on your stuff by looking at it: which would you rather have?
Re:I wonder what the latency is?
on
eyeBlog
·
· Score: 1
It seems the latency wouldn't be such a problem: usually when getting someone's attention you start with something very general that could be inferred from the rest of the conversation or something that doesn't really mean anything. (eg "Hey Frank, did you see the ECSGlasses on the/.?" or "Hey Frank, IN SOVIET RUSSIA, ECSGLASSES INVENT YOU!") It might be a little confusing if they weren't your own conversations, and if you were going to keep a big archive of them, they'd probably need a little labeling; otherwise I don't think this would really be a problem.
Also, I would not be at all surprised if the wearable used some sort of neural net scheme, both because it's an obvious choice and because they're very, very popular with Queen's faculty (I'm a computer science student there, though it's summer break right now...)
Slashdot Mirror
One could argue that some sort of unviersal remote control would be more smaller, cheaper, etc, and nearly effective. The advantage of the Canadian device is that it is something to be incorporated into the appliance without requiring any extra hardware on the user's end, while MIT's requires the user to be wearing the Eye aRe. Given that it's a technology which is supposed to allow greater integration of other technology into our lives through promoting a somewhat more passive control scheme, the requirement to wear a pair of funny looking glasses to get my TV to work is not all that attractive. Imagine you've brought a date back to your place and you want to impress her with your ability to turn on your stuff by looking at it: which would you rather have?
It seems the latency wouldn't be such a problem: usually when getting someone's attention you start with something very general that could be inferred from the rest of the conversation or something that doesn't really mean anything. (eg "Hey Frank, did you see the ECSGlasses on the /.?" or "Hey Frank, IN SOVIET RUSSIA, ECSGLASSES INVENT YOU!") It might be a little confusing if they weren't your own conversations, and if you were going to keep a big archive of them, they'd probably need a little labeling; otherwise I don't think this would really be a problem.
Also, I would not be at all surprised if the wearable used some sort of neural net scheme, both because it's an obvious choice and because they're very, very popular with Queen's faculty (I'm a computer science student there, though it's summer break right now...)