[HN Gopher] Monocle: A pocket sized open-source AR device
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Monocle: A pocket sized open-source AR device
        
       Author : TheBlapse
       Score  : 370 points
       Date   : 2023-02-07 15:30 UTC (7 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.brilliantmonocle.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.brilliantmonocle.com)
        
       | bipop5000 wrote:
       | Vegeta What does your powerlevel say? its over 9000!!!!! is the
       | first thing that came to my mind.
        
         | MonkeyMalarky wrote:
         | They need to make ones that are rounded rectangles in bright
         | blue/green/pink colours!
        
       | shikshake wrote:
       | I've looked around their website and the links people have
       | commented here, but I've yet to see a video or image of the
       | device actually working. I know it's hard to demo AR devices, but
       | a simple video of a phone camera pointing through the device to
       | show that there is actually content displaying would add much
       | more credibility. Especially for $350 I need to see some sort of
       | product demonstration.
        
         | wyldfire wrote:
         | It looks like the website does show a "through the lens" still
         | photo as a part of a chat/endorsement bottom left hand side of
         | the front page. "yeah super excited that our devkit has
         | launched. here's me testing replay."
        
         | bluSCALE4 wrote:
         | The carousel with the play button works if you use the
         | keyboard. It gives you an idea of how it works.
        
         | annon3845 wrote:
         | It's not much, but https://www.instagram.com/p/CgAu-TTlBHS.
         | They're not exactly helping their credibility with claims of
         | 16x superZoom from a 720p camera.
        
           | ortusdux wrote:
           | It looks like it is actually a 5mp camera. Specifically a
           | Omnivision OV5640. I wonder if it is a 720p camera at 16x
           | zoom.
           | 
           | https://docs.brilliantmonocle.com/monocle/monocle/#camera
        
             | Miraste wrote:
             | It's a 5MP camera for still photos, limited to 720p for
             | video--although the data sheet says it can do 1080p as
             | well. Perhaps that's bottlenecked elsewhere in the system.
        
               | canucker2016 wrote:
               | from https://docs.brilliantmonocle.com/monocle/monocle/#b
               | luetooth...:                   It supports Bluetooth 5.2,
               | up to 2Mb/s.
               | 
               | 720p == 1280w x 720h * 3bytes (rgb) * 8bits/byte ==
               | 22.1Mb / frame
               | 
               | So video compression is going to have to get more than
               | ~10x reduction to fit into 2Mb/s and that's just 1
               | frame/sec.
        
             | [deleted]
        
             | dylan604 wrote:
             | 720p claim may be specific to the video recording features
             | while the stills capture could be at the higher resolution.
             | or they could just be over-sampling to help reduce with
             | noise by down-scaling the larger resolution to the smaller.
        
           | tootie wrote:
           | It seems to me that unlike HoloLens and such, it's not trying
           | to be seamless. It's almost entirely obstructing one eye with
           | a small screen. They use a translucent case so you can sorta
           | see around the screen, but not very well. Kinda butts up
           | against what the actual promise of AR was supposed to be.
        
       | com2kid wrote:
       | As someone with only 1 eye, this is quite suited to me! I am
       | actually sad that the previous crop of "low cost, slim, not earth
       | shattering" AR glasses all died out. A camera built into one stem
       | and some simple text displayed for one eye would suffice for a
       | _ton_ of use cases.
       | 
       | A killer app for me would be floating name tags above people's
       | heads, but I imagine that would require better HW than what is
       | available here.
       | 
       | I'd love to see what this looks like actually installed on
       | glasses, in different configurations.
       | 
       | Some simple AR use cases that I'd like to see: ]
       | 
       | * Turn by turn directions
       | 
       | * Incoming high priority notifications
       | 
       | * Weather alerts
       | 
       | * Front door notifications
       | 
       | * Upcoming meetings
       | 
       | * Interior building navigation
       | 
       | * Shopping Lists (hard to do the interactions on this)
       | 
       | The issue here is none of these are a killer feature, so I
       | wouldn't be willing to pay more than a small premium to have them
       | added on top of what I normally pay for frames, but since I
       | already am paying $300-$500 for frames (before insurance), if
       | someone offers the above for another $100 or $150, sure why not.
        
         | dylan604 wrote:
         | >Shopping Lists (hard to do the interactions on this)
         | 
         | with a companion app, you could scan the barcodes of the items
         | as you place them in the cart, and then remove the item from
         | the visible list in the AR HUD. shit, tie that into the actual
         | store's check out system so you don't have to use their stupid
         | POS self-checkout lines. just bag it up and be on your way.
         | other than the products that are sold by weight, this seems
         | like something we're missing out on as a species.
        
           | FinnKuhn wrote:
           | This already exists. One example would be Ikea Scan & Go.
        
           | post-it wrote:
           | Even better, the device can have a camera that watches you
           | put the item in your cart and marks it off the list.
        
             | canucker2016 wrote:
             | Or it checks prices/inventory at other stores and lets you
             | defer purchases to other stores to reduce how much you
             | spend.
        
         | atomicUpdate wrote:
         | > A killer app for me would be floating name tags above
         | people's heads, but I imagine that would require better HW than
         | what is available here.
         | 
         | This is a societal issue, more than a HW/SW issue. Google Glass
         | explicitly bans this type of feature:
         | 
         | https://developers.google.com/glass/policies#c_what_you_cant...
         | 
         | > Don't use the camera or microphone to cross-reference and
         | immediately present personal information identifying anyone
         | other than the user, including use cases such as facial
         | recognition and voice print. Glassware that do this will not be
         | approved at this time.
         | 
         | This is in response to Congress raising Privacy concerns:
         | https://slate.com/technology/2013/05/google-glass-facial-rec...
         | 
         | I wouldn't expect any "official" facial recognition on any of
         | these upcoming AR devices any time soon.
        
           | eggy wrote:
           | So Google basically banned Ironman! I am sure the government
           | uses such devices responsibly ;)
        
           | joshspankit wrote:
           | Not even an exception for user-entered data.
           | 
           | Like, I could conceivably take photos of people I meet, store
           | those photos along with notes in the iOS notes app (or even a
           | contact app) then create a panel of those photos so that I
           | can tap the right person and bring up those notes when I see
           | them again. AR would simply make this easier and faster.
           | Unless the AR camera was hidden it would not make it
           | different from a privacy perspective.
        
             | j5155 wrote:
             | To make things more confusing, both the iOS photos app and
             | Google Photos automatically find faces in your photos and
             | the other photos containing them and let you easily tag
             | each face with the correct name. The technology to do this
             | already exists.
        
           | robertlagrant wrote:
           | It'd be useful for teachers who are trying to remember the
           | class' names! Geofenced, of course.
        
           | once_inc wrote:
           | Pretty wild for congress to raise privacy concerns,
           | considering the ungodly amount of data they harvest every day
           | on both their own citizens and those of other countries
           | across a variety of mediums, agencies, and subsidiaries...
        
           | com2kid wrote:
           | > This is a societal issue, more than a HW/SW issue. Google
           | Glass explicitly bans this type of feature:
           | 
           | Which is ridiculous, it is giving an advantage to people who
           | were born with a good memory for faces.
           | 
           | Do not allow for lookups in any sort of online database, all
           | tagging has to be done locally by the user.
        
           | xwdv wrote:
           | > I wouldn't expect any "official" facial recognition on any
           | of these upcoming AR devices any time soon.
           | 
           | I would, just not for the general public. This would be very
           | helpful for police to immediately do a check on people around
           | them and spot people with active warrants.
        
           | fatnoah wrote:
           | > > A killer app for me would be floating name tags above
           | people's heads, but I imagine that would require better HW
           | than what is available here.
           | 
           | Which is too bad, since I see AR as potentially being a
           | massively useful device for those with memory issues,
           | dementia, or who generally need some help with things like
           | this.
        
             | jakzurr wrote:
             | _floating name tags over heads_
             | 
             | I'd have given anything for that 35 years ago. First thing
             | on any contract job, I'd make a map of desks & names - but
             | it always tripped me up when people slipped over to work at
             | a different desk!
        
             | joshspankit wrote:
             | As someone who has struggled with names and dates and times
             | my whole life, that is the single use that I was interested
             | in.
        
           | SkyBelow wrote:
           | >This is a societal issue, more than a HW/SW issue. Google
           | Glass explicitly bans this type of feature:
           | 
           | Seems like one of those things that can't be stopped. It can
           | be slowed, as Google has done, but eventually OSS will allow
           | for it. If it is massively outlawed then it can be reduced,
           | but even then it'll still be on the level of hidden cameras.
        
         | vsareto wrote:
         | >* Turn by turn directions
         | 
         | I wouldn't touch any kind of AR use case while driving. Seems
         | ripe for lawsuits when you're obscuring a driver's view
         | (especially with an eyepiece compared to putting a HUD on the
         | windshield)
        
           | criddell wrote:
           | Once head tracking is working, couldn't you show the AR view
           | in the exact same place that a windshield HUD would appear?
        
             | fatnoah wrote:
             | Yes, yes you could.
        
             | vsareto wrote:
             | The easiest way for that is to have the user set that
             | position to account for the car model, driver height, and
             | seat position, but you're not likely to find a way to pick
             | a good safe spot to show it without asking the user.
             | 
             | But if you say this is safe to use while driving, you need
             | to handle situations where "this AR app had a bug which
             | drew a solid color over the entire view, obstructing my
             | view, and caused me to miss the pedestrian", while a
             | projected HUD has a limited area it can draw on.
             | 
             | If you can't/won't say it's safe to use while driving, then
             | why develop the feature for driving?
             | 
             | This being an eye piece which has software control over
             | your entire field of view has potential for danger.
             | 
             | Then you will have to make sure all of that doesn't
             | replicate these results from the out set:
             | https://arstechnica.com/cars/2015/07/heads-up-displays-in-
             | ca...
        
           | giancarlostoro wrote:
           | It could work for walking though.
        
           | com2kid wrote:
           | > I wouldn't touch any kind of AR use case while driving.
           | Seems ripe for lawsuits when you're obscuring a driver's view
           | (especially with an eyepiece compared to putting a HUD on the
           | windshield)
           | 
           | Cities, walking. :)
           | 
           | Walking around a city pulling out my phone to check
           | directions is actively stupid, a HUD with arrows telling me
           | what intersection to go down would improve safety on multiple
           | fronts. (Theft and not situational awareness).
        
         | dopidopHN wrote:
         | Fun; I would just want to plug it to various device though MQTT
         | and do trippy display.
        
         | jayd16 wrote:
         | I think these are actually kind of lame use cases. They can
         | almost entirely be replaced with a smart watch.
         | 
         | Where this device has a unique advantage is overlay AR. Turn by
         | turn is somewhat there but I think a better way to look at this
         | is passive information. You could walk by a business and see
         | hours on a virtual sign. You could make an app to leave virtual
         | art you could stumble on. I'd like to see more ideas like that.
         | Just a new way to show notifications doesn't cut it for me.
        
           | pbhjpbhj wrote:
           | Fix practically anything that instructions have been made
           | for, unscrew here, unclip that, pull out that, replace this
           | part; do it all backwards to put back together ... with
           | visual overlays you're acting as a robot almost (that's good
           | and bad).
           | 
           | Also, anything the AR can see you put down/drop can be
           | remembered; anything you're looking for can be highlighted
           | (in theory).
           | 
           | Would be fun to work on some other ideas.
        
             | cptskippy wrote:
             | That would all be great but alas very battery intensive and
             | things like dropped item tracking would require a high
             | speed high fidelity camera.
        
           | com2kid wrote:
           | > You could walk by a business and see hours on a virtual
           | sign.
           | 
           | Most stores have those posted already. :-D
           | 
           | > They can almost entirely be replaced with a smart watch.
           | 
           | Agreed, unfortunately current smart watches are tasked with
           | doing a lot, and as a result they are not very good at
           | blending into the background of life.
           | 
           | I'd also love a life logger, being able to see snapshots of
           | my day and quickly create journal entries. An automatic
           | record of everyone I talked to, summaries of important
           | conversations.
           | 
           | Human potential could be greatly expanded with current day
           | technology but sadly we are limiting ourselves.
        
         | fatnoah wrote:
         | > Turn by turn directions > Interior building navigation
         | 
         | Disclosure: I worked at one of the companies spending big on AR
         | and worked on these exact use cases. Sadly, the company was not
         | excited by these cases in the short term, so the projects were
         | effectively cancelled. I fully expect them to be revived at
         | some point, but not any time soon.
        
         | rodolphoarruda wrote:
         | As a father of a kid with 1,5 eye -- my daughter's left eye
         | stopped developing at young age so we missed the window of
         | opportunity to have it corrected on time, so one eye does most
         | of the heavy lifting for her, and the other eye can only see a
         | blur -- your comment made me think of possible use cases for
         | the monocle for her. Maybe notifications using colors and
         | shapes that could be perceived by the underdeveloped eye. I
         | believe the signals from the monocle would not interfere in any
         | way with the good eye, so from a brain's perspective, both
         | things could coexist independently. And, as you suggested, it
         | could well be a "clip-on" addition to the frame itself. That
         | would be nice.
        
       | danielEM wrote:
       | I like all these "cool" devices, love the idea, even got myself
       | nreal air, but ... these are overpriced gadgets, I mean not worth
       | the money that you have to pay for them as these do nothing well:
       | not a good AR, not a good screen, not a convenient device,
       | expensive.
        
       | batch12 wrote:
       | It'd be cool if something like this could be used to selectively
       | overlay thermal/ir/uv, night vision, or provide a colorblind
       | accessibility tool. I think I would have a use for it then.
        
         | pastdiscovery wrote:
         | It already can be and has been done. Look at Mann's Thermocam
         | EyeTap, or half of his other papers. He revisits mediating
         | human vision with extrasensory overlays often.
        
         | Miraste wrote:
         | I have some AR glasses that plug into a phone, and I've been
         | experimenting with running the camera feed and using it as a
         | third eye (looking up on shelves, eye in the back of the head,
         | etc). It's less disorienting than I expected, and in an
         | integrated product I'm convinced it would be useful. The camera
         | in the Monocle is unfortunately very old and cheap, but a
         | modern phone main sensor could do wonders for accessibility.
         | Besides what you've listed, written text magnification and
         | highlighting has huge potential.
        
           | alchemist1e9 wrote:
           | Would glasses like yours work for passive monitoring of some
           | basic tui dashboards while hiking?
           | 
           | The ideal time for my personal daily commute/schedule to go
           | on a 45 min daily hike/walk is 8am-9am. However at exactly
           | that time some important automated business processes occur
           | (markets related) that it's best I keep an eye on.
           | 
           | If I could wear some glasses that display the information
           | required safely I probably could lose 15 lbs easily as I'd be
           | able to exercise regularly by hiking each morning, weather
           | permitting. Since I also carry a MicroPC and LTE
           | connectivity, and phone, so if I see a serious issue on AR
           | glasses I could just stop somewhere and get access.
           | 
           | Weird question I guess.
        
       | itomato wrote:
       | Paging Zach Friedman
        
       | proee wrote:
       | This looks like some kind of Luke-Skywalker Star Wars hardware.
        
       | AstixAndBelix wrote:
       | "A pocket sized open-source AR device"
       | 
       | a sentence to get Californians and Texans both excited
        
       | Digeridoo_92 wrote:
       | I think this would be super killer out of the box if it did most
       | of what Pebble smartwatches did/do.
        
       | kreetx wrote:
       | Looks really good, anyone have first hand experience?
        
       | iamflimflam1 wrote:
       | Ordered one (I'm a sucker for tech) - will put up a video once it
       | arrives...
        
       | MR4D wrote:
       | This just seems too good to be true.
       | 
       | And why do they have a patent on it if it's open source? Do they
       | mean just the code? (It only looks like it has the MIT license,
       | so assuming just the code).
       | 
       | IF it's real, then it's pretty neat.
        
         | traverseda wrote:
         | It's not that much beyond what hobbyists are already making for
         | HMDs.
        
         | breck wrote:
         | Patented products are strictly worse. Imagine Monocle engineers
         | come up with a slightly better design, but they realize it's
         | not covered by their patent. What will they do?
         | 
         | As soon as one has a patent, then they are incentivized to sell
         | their patented thing, not to switch to the thing that is better
         | for their customers.
         | 
         | Patents are a way for lawyers to inject themselves where they
         | don't belong to extract rent, making us all worse off. Patents
         | are a negative sum game.
        
           | UncleEntity wrote:
           | > What will they do?
           | 
           | File a new patent?
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | comment_ran wrote:
       | What's the weight of it?
       | 
       | Can I choose different shape of it? For example, rectangular one?
        
         | hermes0 wrote:
         | weight: 15g (see https://www.brilliantmonocle.com/monocle)
        
           | comment_ran wrote:
           | Thanks. It's on their font page indeed.
        
           | comment_ran wrote:
           | 2 cad + 2*25cents = 15.7 g
        
       | ge96 wrote:
       | This is really cool almost urge-bought it.
       | 
       | But I wonder what do I use it for?
       | 
       | Looks like you can program it yourself so that's great.
       | 
       | Get more familiarity with FPGA.
       | 
       | I'm thinking about it.
       | 
       | Well... I've supported SVR and Pine64 why not this.
       | 
       | Nothing else can use it to record videos of my stuff working at
       | workbench (not a lot of onboard storage though).
       | 
       | Ordered one, will see how it goes. It definitely blocks a
       | significant part of your vision but I figure I can toy around
       | with it while I'm cooking food. 3D print some glasses for it.
       | 
       | I would be curious if you bought two, could the two talk to each
       | other... but the hardware kind of blocks your vision/does not
       | seem ideal... still it's something to tinker with.
        
         | randmeerkat wrote:
         | > Ordered one, will see how it goes.
         | 
         | Do you have a blog, where it's possible to see what you learn?
        
           | ge96 wrote:
           | uhh... this is supposedly my non doxxable account but I will
           | post a video on it on YT once I have it. I've done other
           | devices eg. Pinephones/SimulaOS/Remarkable 2, so whenever I
           | get this I will post it.
           | 
           | looks like once bought they will ship from NY so I should
           | have it in a week or so
        
             | ge96 wrote:
             | edit: SimulaVR software not OS
        
       | TaylorAlexander wrote:
       | Disorienting to see "open source" and "patented" on the same
       | page.
        
         | goodpoint wrote:
         | They patented the hardware and only the software is "open
         | source".
         | 
         | The MIT license does not provide license to use patents. It's
         | really open source in the letter but not in the spirit.
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | Manuel_D wrote:
       | This is interesting, but I'm not sure what's the value add over a
       | smartphone camera. Normally AR lets you project into stereoscopic
       | vision and create 3d shapes in the user's vision - but the
       | monocle sacrifices this. Perhaps portability, but it looks pretty
       | chunky to wear. Smartphones are actually great for lot of AR
       | tasks. Apps like the one that puts a chevron over mountain peaks
       | when hiking continue to impress me. But it'd be cool if it finds
       | niche - don't want to sound too critical.
        
       | mindwork wrote:
       | I'm confused why there is no YouTube in the social media section
       | on the site. Demo video is what I need the most to make a
       | decision about buying a product
        
         | Buildstarted wrote:
         | Found this on their instagram.
         | https://www.instagram.com/p/CgAu-TTlBHS/
        
         | ge96 wrote:
         | Found something (shows phone using some kind of app/terminal to
         | connect to device updating firmware)
         | 
         | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-DYI3DfHPyw
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | xezian wrote:
       | > For normal anticipated use, Monocle's battery will last for
       | approximately 2 hours and can be recharged in its case up to 6
       | times.
       | 
       | So only 12 hours of total use? Hoping it's a typo or not what it
       | sounds like.
        
         | jkelleyrtp wrote:
         | Like AirPods, the case has its own battery.
        
           | xezian wrote:
           | Ohh, that makes sense, thanks! If I owned AirPods or really
           | any comparable product I probably would have understood right
           | away.
        
             | petethepig wrote:
             | I own airpods and I was just as confused.
        
               | Wistar wrote:
               | Me, too. I thought it was oddly disposable or something.
        
               | gwd wrote:
               | The website definitely needs to clarify that -- I was
               | confused until I saw a photo of the "charging case"
               | somewhere, and then it clicked.
        
         | SparkyMcUnicorn wrote:
         | Someone else answered, but here are some more details. Case has
         | a 450mA battery in it, and a USB Type-C jack to recharge it.
         | 
         | https://docs.brilliantmonocle.com/monocle/monocle/#charging-...
        
       | SV_BubbleTime wrote:
       | "For the imaginative hacker"
       | 
       | Translation... _we made some easy hardware, but software is hard
       | and we're not even sure what our device will be for, maybe this
       | will be cool later?_
        
       | the_arun wrote:
       | Honestly $349 is too expensive. Potentially < $100 would
       | encourage DIY folks.
        
         | numpad0 wrote:
         | Not ideal but kind of understandable in my opinion, sourcing a
         | nice microdisplay is hard without connections, and possibly
         | some investment.
        
       | matai_kolila wrote:
       | [dead]
        
       | anigbrowl wrote:
       | Neat but (still) pricey. Not sold on the 640x480 display; it
       | requires work to focus you eye to such a short distance and due
       | to macular degeneration that will be increasingly impossible as
       | you age. In my 20s I could focus on things a couple of
       | centimeters (~1") away with the naked eye, in my 50 it's about
       | 15cm (5-6"). You can still perceive color, movement etc so a ring
       | of LEDs would convey information well, tut trying to read
       | anything like a map or scrolling messages limits your market to
       | the youth, and probably the myopic youth at that.
        
         | oezi wrote:
         | The biggest issue is the lack of a camera facing backwards to
         | track your eyes. Without it you can't overlay accurately onto
         | real objects.
        
           | andybak wrote:
           | I'm not sure thats the right mechanism for positional
           | tracking.
           | 
           | But in any case - without 6dof then this isn't really AR in
           | any usual sense of the term. It's just half a Google Glass,
           | surely?
        
         | sxp wrote:
         | > ...it requires work to focus you eye to such a short
         | distance...
         | 
         | Modern wearable displays have a focal distance between 1m and
         | infinity to improve comfort.
         | 
         | From https://docs.brilliantmonocle.com/monocle/monocle/#display
         | 
         | > The result is a transparent floating display with a 20deg
         | field of view. About the size of a table display at arms
         | length.
        
           | Groxx wrote:
           | I'm fairly sure that quote is only to give a sense of how big
           | "20deg" is, as most people aren't intuitively familiar with
           | vision cones.
           | 
           | I can't find anything that actually states the focal
           | distance, though I agree there's a decent chance it's at
           | infinity.
        
         | UncleEntity wrote:
         | I think the idea is to project the screen into space at a
         | distance.
         | 
         | The documentation shows something like this where the
         | projection is off axis from the actual mirror doing the
         | projection.
        
       | patze wrote:
       | I recently build an AR indoor navigation system for people with
       | cognitive impairments. Is there any way to include an inertial
       | measurement unit (IMU) in this form factor so we can use VIO?
        
       | candyman wrote:
       | Anyone ever check out these Lucyd glasses? They are new, company
       | is trying to make a push. Maybe the time is right? Always seems
       | too early.
       | 
       | https://lucyd.co/
        
       | achow wrote:
       | Detailed documentation gives lot more clarity on the components
       | and how does it work. Example, the display that is being used:
       | 
       | https://docs.brilliantmonocle.com/monocle/monocle/#display
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | NHQ wrote:
       | I'm holding out for full 480p
        
       | danielnoiz wrote:
       | Somewhat related, this and Tilt Five[1] have me excited for the
       | AR gaming space.
       | 
       | [1] https://www.tiltfive.com/
        
         | latchkey wrote:
         | OMG that would make battle chess so awesome.
         | 
         | Original: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qKcZwPb7C3k
         | 
         | Modern: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LmJ5gmfLHM
        
         | Groxx wrote:
         | Tilt Five is a pretty impressive demo of how good (and cheap!)
         | retroreflection can be, but tbh I think the format is just
         | kinda unusable outside of demonstrations. It'll always be a
         | "small" surface, or it'll take up way too much room that you
         | can't use for literally anything else, as you risk damaging the
         | surface. And when it's big, you lose a ton of usable space
         | because you're seeing the far stuff at a sharp angle, so you
         | can't render "big" things over there.
         | 
         | Maybe a roll-down giant screen like for a projector display
         | would work better, to give you a big virtual "hole" in a wall,
         | but I've only seen it on those smallish tables. Possibly due to
         | projection power/angle limits?
        
       | thot_experiment wrote:
       | I want an open source monochrome vector display delivered by
       | laser to my retinas directly. I would slambuy such a thing and
       | dedicated the rest of my life to making the best pocketable
       | chorded keyboard.
       | 
       | I, like many of you, am very good at telling a computer what to
       | do with letters and symbols. I spend a lot of time in voice calls
       | and I often write little scripts while I'm talking to answer
       | questions, ballpark numbers etc. That's not to mention the power
       | of tools like Wolfram Alpha and Google.
       | 
       | I would like that to be everpresent in my life. I know we'll get
       | some semblance of this with conversational AI at some point soon,
       | but for me I crave the determinism of real programming. I want to
       | be able to summon a quake-style REPL from the sky at will, and
       | while looking someone face to face google facts or compute
       | probabilities. I want to be able to sketch algorithms while
       | walking around in nature.
       | 
       | (Intel was working on something like this at one point but sadly
       | the project was abandoned)
        
         | leach wrote:
         | Have you ever read snow crash? Makes me immediately think of
         | when Hiro goes into gargoyle mode.
         | 
         | I think it would be quite fun to have a HUD like that for daily
         | life.
        
         | atoav wrote:
         | Seems like a good space for advertisement and pop ups
        
         | wiml wrote:
         | I knew some people at a university lab which had developed
         | exactly this -- back in the 90s or 00s. I think the problems it
         | had are mostly solved since then (lightweight compute/fast
         | digital radio/etc).
         | 
         | Presumably the university eventually sold the patents off and
         | they're sitting in some dusty corporate vault now, but maybe
         | they'll expire soon.
        
         | nighthawk454 wrote:
         | I remember that Intel project - Vaunt. They sold the patents to
         | North which was acquired by Google. According to this reddit
         | thread, most of the team went to Magic Leap afterwards
         | 
         | https://www.reddit.com/r/AR_MR_XR/comments/javtb8/remember_t...
        
         | birdyrooster wrote:
         | Aren't lasers high energy? Why would you ever want that
         | pointing into your eye? Why not project regular light?
         | 
         | Edit: never mind above TIL lasers are light and can be dimmed
        
           | croes wrote:
           | No, there are low power lasers
           | 
           | https://hackaday.com/2020/04/15/the-smallest-large-
           | display-i...
        
           | tootie wrote:
           | Laser just means the light is tightly focussed in a beam. It
           | says nothing of intensity or wavelength. Those little pen-
           | size laser pointers run on AAA batteries.
        
           | pastdiscovery wrote:
           | Can/has been done before. To make VRDs safe, they need to be
           | dimmed with a filter, but it's achievable.
        
           | once_inc wrote:
           | Lasers are regular light, just all pointed in the same
           | direction. The output of the laser (its capacity) is what
           | makes it "high energy" and the number of photons hitting your
           | retina is directly responsible for any warming of the tissue.
           | A laser capable of just a bit of power, enough to outshine
           | regular daylight by a little bit would be more than enough in
           | most cases to make it feasible without concerns to your eyes
           | damaging.
        
         | skedaddle wrote:
         | Dumb question maybe, but why does it need to be transparent or
         | else projected directly into your eye? What doesn't work (or
         | wouldn't work for you) about a flip-down hard backed display?
        
       | l2silver wrote:
       | So what kind of projects do people generally build for these type
       | of OS AR devices?
        
         | ge96 wrote:
         | What I'm gonna try is text reading. Like send in snippets of
         | text from whatever news/twitter... and read it while doing
         | dishes/waiting for food to cook. (assumption from bluetooth
         | connection from phone)
        
           | alchemist1e9 wrote:
           | Perhaps there is something already for this. Another comment
           | pointed out that would be HUD not AR.
           | 
           | What you describe is something I also want/need.
        
       | actionfromafar wrote:
       | I wonder why they chose the Nordic MCU.
        
       | 88stacks wrote:
       | I would hope they include some basic apparel to wear the device.
       | should one wear it as a pirate's eye patch?
        
         | UncleEntity wrote:
         | Looks like it has a clip to attach to the front of a pair of
         | glasses.
         | 
         | Obviously suboptimal, really needs to be integrated into some
         | old-timey welding goggles for the steampunk vibe.
         | 
         | At $349 it's _almost_ in the range where I'd buy it to play
         | around with but I suspect it'd end up in a drawer like a bunch
         | of other things that looked cool but I never got around to
         | hacking on. Once the technology gets good enough where they can
         | fit it into a regular pair of glasses then we can talk --
         | though looking at this Bluetooth Aftershockz headset I use that
         | day probably isn't too far off.
        
           | petsfed wrote:
           | I suspect that fitting something like this into what looks
           | like standard prescription glasses will require some advances
           | in manufacturing optical materials. I think its already
           | possible to make the appropriate lenses to sufficient
           | precision, but the cost is a bit prohibitive.
           | 
           | The other issue is that the projection display is a bit low-
           | res for what I'd really like to see, but 1 pixel works out to
           | ~0.5mm at 1m, so it might be ok. That might be precise enough
           | for (for instance) identifying particular through-hole
           | connections on a circuit board at a rework station. It's
           | certainly adequate for identifying components on an engine.
        
           | bleuuuu wrote:
           | they are actually releasing a glasses version
        
           | floren wrote:
           | I could combine it with the $200+ Twiddler keyboard that's
           | been sitting in the drawer for 5 years, and maybe I'd be on
           | to something!
        
         | lanternfish wrote:
         | I think the idea is that it clips onto glasses
        
       | arnaudsm wrote:
       | Is there a demo video ?
        
         | ge96 wrote:
         | closest thing I found so far, shows the real device
         | 
         | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-DYI3DfHPyw
        
       | oldstrangers wrote:
       | "opto-mechanical" is a wonderful collection of words.
        
       | intrasight wrote:
       | So is the idea that this would work in conjunction with one's
       | smartphone?
        
         | traverseda wrote:
         | Probably a lot of the same use cases as google glass when you
         | pair it with a smart phone. I don't think it's going to be
         | "augmented reality", you're not going to have very much luck
         | live-overlaying map data with the base unit. The built in FPGA
         | means you can probably do some real time stuff if you really
         | want.
         | 
         | The FPGA+micropython means that there's a lot you could do on
         | device if you put in enough development time and converted your
         | code to run directly on the FPGA, but it probably works best if
         | paired with a smart phone. Someone like google could probably
         | get this doing real time text translation off that FPGA, but I
         | sure can't.
         | 
         | When paired with a phone you could use this to do real-time
         | subtitles for the hard of hearing, display bike direction,
         | there's all kinds of uses. Really all it has is bluetooth, the
         | camera, some touch controls along the rim, and the display.
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | ramesh31 wrote:
       | Without 6DOF tracking or depth mapping, this is just a HUD, not
       | AR. Still neat though.
        
         | alchemist1e9 wrote:
         | Do you know of any existing HUD type glasses that could be
         | customized or have an API from a Linux system?
        
         | blensor wrote:
         | Are there any relatively low cost 6DOF standalone tracking
         | systems in the wild? The closest thing I know are the Quest Pro
         | controllers, but I don't understand why nobody is building such
         | a thing as a plug an play solution that you can stick onto
         | something and have immediate inside out positioning
        
           | numpad0 wrote:
           | Sony mocopi QM-SS1 is kind of 6DoF standalone
           | 
           | 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0d-x0l2HtA
        
         | numpad0 wrote:
         | Technically anything with a camera can be a 6DoF tracker
        
         | ge96 wrote:
         | Yeah I'm curious about that, is an IMU enough to work well. The
         | iPad/iPhone with the lidar it's rock solid when I tried it.
         | 
         | I don't know if you can offload processing onto your phone with
         | this, lag is not good or just not possible. IMU wouldn't make
         | sense (phone in your pocket) but yeah. Not sure how you'd do
         | the VIO without the I.
        
           | Miraste wrote:
           | An IMU is enough for 3dof, but not 6dof. An IMU and a camera
           | is enough for 6dof but not on that FPGA.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-02-07 23:00 UTC)