[HN Gopher] The End of Marae - my attempt to build the AR cloud
___________________________________________________________________
The End of Marae - my attempt to build the AR cloud
Author : realiswhatyoufe
Score : 26 points
Date : 2021-06-23 16:04 UTC (2 days ago)
(HTM) web link (scriber.tech)
(TXT) w3m dump (scriber.tech)
| goodcjw2 wrote:
| Properly head-mounted AR technology (ideally in the form of a
| pair of glasses/sunglasses) can have lots of potentials, but does
| require science-fiction level of imagination to visualize those
| use cases.
|
| Unfortunately, this is really hard. Mark Zuckerberg calls it "one
| of the hardest technical challenges of the decade". There are
| lots of fundamental technical breakthrough required to make it a
| reality. In different prototype labs, people are excited to see
| feasibilities being proved out in individual fronts. But moving
| _all_ of them into production ready consumer grade hardware is a
| completely different story.
|
| Give it another 5 years, we might be able to see whether it's
| indeed possible.
|
| [1] https://www.zdnet.com/article/mark-zuckerberg-calls-ar-
| glass...
| nonameiguess wrote:
| Maybe this is just my personal bias against even wearing
| glasses, but to me, this kind of tech isn't viable as long as
| it requires a wearable at all. I don't even like wearing a
| watch. Until the projectors are built into the environment
| itself, like my walls can directly put holograms into the room
| with me, I won't want to use something like this.
|
| Or I guess if it's some kind of direct brain implant, though
| there's no way in hell I'm ever voluntarily implanting a
| Facebook product.
| user3939382 wrote:
| I've consistently been 10-15 years ahead of major changes in tech
| so I'm confident in my instincts here: the future of computing is
| wearable or implanted, integrated BCI and AR. Whether that's 20,
| 50, or 100 years off I have no idea.
| [deleted]
| smoldesu wrote:
| > As the next paradigm of human-computer interaction, the
| emerging AR Cloud will fundamentally change the way we live,
| play, learn, and work.
|
| Tangent: why is AR so attractive to people?
|
| I've had VR since the first Oculus Quest came out, so I
| definitely understand the value in a good spatial experience.
| I've never had the desire for that immersion to lessen so I can
| start working with holographic oversight. Much like transparent
| displays, I think the idea of AR is a lot cooler than it will
| work in practice. It's fitting function to form, which is the
| wrong way to approach a problem like this.
| babyshake wrote:
| The killer app will be meetings. Apple knows this.
| rdw wrote:
| When Google Maps came out in 2004 and revolutionized mapping
| with the sheer quantity of data presented unbelievably
| smoothly, there was a similar (though smaller) excitment about
| "map-based" apps. It seemed like such a big blue ocean had
| opened and fortunes would be made on the back of new killer
| apps. I worked on a few prototypes myself and saw many pitches
| from various maps-based startups.
|
| But pretty much only Yelp was able to succeed. There just
| aren't a lot of highly-monetizable applications that are
| primarily map-based. No one knew the limits at the time,
| though.
|
| I think AR is in kind of the same place. The demos are
| mindblowing and there's enthusiasm, but there aren't a lot of
| killer apps with the state of the technology. For location-
| based apps, they really required a second piece in order to
| really open up the space: the smartphone. It may be that AR is
| waiting for some other supporting technologies before it
| becomes obviously laden with utility.
| psyc wrote:
| I admit I'm always puzzled by this as well, and can't help
| feeling (perhaps unfairly) that it's like preferring vinyl.
| Every VR thread I've ever seen has a lot of "VR is dead because
| of the resolution and it makes people sick, but AR! AR is
| endless possibilities!" Like, I think augmenting the world is
| cool. But going to an imaginary world is much cooler. Maybe
| it's just that I'm an escapist by nature, and other people are
| more adult and practical.
| alonmower wrote:
| AR will replace your phone
|
| VR could replace your TV
| smoldesu wrote:
| Correction:
|
| VR will replace your TV
|
| AR could replace your phone
| kybernetikos wrote:
| I think it's because VR can give you super powers in an
| imaginary world while AR can give you super powers in the real
| world.
| smoldesu wrote:
| What experiences does AR enable that are otherwise not
| possible with VR/traditional displays?
| psyc wrote:
| Walking around the city and seeing everyone's sins
| displayed above their heads.
| ve55 wrote:
| To give a very short answer: getting most people to
| purchase and commonly use a VR headset is much more
| difficult than getting them to purchase a light set of
| glasses that they can wear and use anywhere with ease.
| There's many more applications as well, but there is absurd
| potential in it still imo.
| smoldesu wrote:
| Counterpoint: The Oculus Quest 2 costs $300, and I have
| yet to see a headset come close to it's level of
| adoption, let alone it's price. AR will be wildly
| expensive for the foreseeable future, and by the time
| we've fully democratized it there will be _some new_
| computing paradigm right around the corner.
|
| Sure, more people will likely prefer AR to VR in terms of
| comfort, but you need to manage your expectations. A
| "light set of glasses" isn't going to come within
| spitting distance of the resolution, FOV, contrast or
| brightness of even the earliest VR headsets.
| kybernetikos wrote:
| That's the wrong way to think about it - they allow you to
| have experiences in the real world that would otherwise
| only be available in virtual worlds.
|
| And there are lots of examples:
|
| - seeing the upcoming birthdays/recent messages/interests
| you have in common etc of people you meet above their heads
| as you walk around.
|
| - having a map projected onto the sky of the world around
| you (like you're on a globe inside a globe looking up)
|
| - removing visual clutter, like unwanted adverts
|
| - allowing each user of a house or space to have it
| decorated the way they like
|
| - having x-ray vision to see things like cables, pipes etc
| in walls
|
| - seeing historical reconstructions in the same place as
| the real thing
|
| - visualizing a new item in the real world and manipulate
| it before you 3d print it
|
| - time-inverted trails - having an inverse trail showing
| you had to do movements you're trying to learn.
|
| - when trying to build something, seeing the exact places
| and actions you need to take in the real world
|
| - adding panes of information into the world where
| otherwise you don't have easy access to the internet. Like
| having a mobile phone of whatever size you want that hovers
| next to you.
|
| - leaving virtual objects in locations for friends
|
| - embodying virtual assistants into daemon like creatures
|
| In fact, with well implemented AR (a much harder problem of
| course than VR), you can have all the same experiences you
| can have in VR plus versions of those experiences that
| blend in the real world and environment you are in. It's
| strictly a superset of VR.
| suifbwish wrote:
| You left out the INEVITABLE real time deep learning based
| nudificafion mode where someone can choose whether or not
| your clothing exists in their reality.
|
| Classically Augmented reality has been just to add things
| to the visual perception of the world that were not there
| but with advancements in various geometry manipulative
| neural networks and processing power creating new things
| will probably take a back seat to visually changing what
| is already there.
|
| Also as facial recognition becomes a much more public and
| available technology we are going to see AR net platforms
| emerge that allow people to "rate" and "comment" on other
| people which will be something permanently and publicly
| associated with their biometric geometry. The potential
| for offensive and unremovable graffiti and reputation
| sabotage is extremely high.
|
| Needless to say there are significant and negative real
| world implications for this and other similar emerging
| technologies which will cause major social conundrums
| which have not yet had to be considered.
|
| One issue with these things is the only method for doing
| anything about it is legislation. AR and VR can be just
| considered just a significant extension of what we call
| the human imagination although there is one major
| difference, this imagination can be shared with anyone
| whereas ones imagination is available exclusively to the
| individual.
| germinalphrase wrote:
| Sure - but some flavor of this objection can be made
| about most technological advances. The harms will be
| identified and if the people maintain some level of
| accountability over the system and society, we will adapt
| to ameliorate those harms.
| smoldesu wrote:
| > with well implemented
|
| That's your crux. You can talk a big game about how cool
| _the concept_ of AR is, but we 're still far off from
| implementing anything remotely similar to what you've
| just described.
|
| > It's strictly a superset of VR
|
| Nope, it's the other way around actually. It might
| logically follow that augmenting reality is easier than
| virtualization it, but AR technology is only as good as
| the VR technology it's based on.
| kybernetikos wrote:
| > we're still far off from implementing anything remotely
| similar to what you've just described
|
| Absolutely. Well, you can do poor implementations of
| quite a few of these already but not at all at the level
| that would make them compelling yet.
|
| But that's not surprising. True AR has all the same
| challenges as VR plus realtime detection, location,
| registration, occlusion, lighting... And much stricter
| constraints on portability, brightness, etc.
|
| But you shouldn't be surprised that something with so
| much potential is interesting to people.
|
| > augmenting reality is easier than virtualization it
|
| Not at all! It's massively harder. Well, to do real AR
| (which in my opinion involves actual engagement with the
| real environment). To do floating HUDs is much less of a
| challenge, and also much less interesting.
| goodcjw2 wrote:
| One way to think about AR is that it can do everything your
| Oculus Quest can do, but in the form of a pair of glasses that
| you can wear all day (like those prescription glasses that
| people already wearing).
|
| VR is like the PC you use at home / in office, AR is more like
| smartphones on the go. There is obviously quite a big technical
| gap :)
| smoldesu wrote:
| This "AR" that you're describing doesn't exist though.
| Current AR-equipped devices don't have anywhere near the FOV
| or contrast you can find in a basic HMD.
|
| Also, your second analogy is paradoxical. If AR is capable of
| doing "everything [the] Oculus Quest can do", why does VR
| even exist today?
|
| I understand the concept of AR, I just want to talk to
| someone actually involved in the hardware space about what
| they're doing to move the market forwards.
| Animats wrote:
| _Tangent: why is AR so attractive to people?_
|
| Or, why is the _idea_ of AR so attractive to people? We haven
| 't seen much AR yet. Magic Leap was faking it. The Microsoft
| Hololens had some great demos, but was too expensive and not
| very useful. Google Glass was somewhat useful but socially
| unacceptable. Pokemon GO was wildly successful but googles are
| still too expensive for it.
|
| OK, so you can annotate the world. Now what? Games? Customer
| relationship management? Equipment maintenance guides? Doordash
| picking guidance?
|
| I have the horrible feeling that most people who wear AR
| goggles will be wearing them because their employer told them
| to. The goggles tell them what to do.
|
| (As usual, see "Manna" and "Hyperreality").
| T-A wrote:
| > The Microsoft Hololens had some great demos, but was too
| expensive and not very useful
|
| https://www.geekwire.com/2021/microsoft-awarded-army-
| contrac...
| babyshake wrote:
| Magic Leap was real. It just kinda sucked.
| jonas21 wrote:
| The Magic Leap they sold everyone on:
|
| https://youtu.be/watch?v=GbpqwUUfMAQ
|
| The Magic Leap they actually delivered:
|
| https://youtu.be/veSZJQ5_Wmg?t=122
| beebeepka wrote:
| For me it's virtual screens. Let's have that and see where it
| takes us.
| germinalphrase wrote:
| Thirty years ago, you might drive around an unfamiliar city
| with a friend offering directions as you go. Twenty years ago,
| you woukd print off turn by turn Mapquest directions and check
| them occasionally at a stop light. Now, you can have turn by
| turn directions piped into your ear without any other human
| assistance, allowing you to do the task at hand easier, safer
| and more quickly. Don't be distracted by the challenges of the
| visual HUD, this is absolutely our AR present: overlaying
| digital tools and information onto our lived experience to make
| ourselves happier, smarter, more effective, etc.
| bredren wrote:
| > I don't think I've ever learned, or grown, this much in a 6
| month period before.
|
| Was this a startup of a personal project? Was much money raised?
| Post mortem analysis is good though this is quite an exposition
| for a relatively short lived venture.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-06-25 23:01 UTC)