- cross-posted to:
- technology@beehaw.org
- cross-posted to:
- technology@beehaw.org
You must log in or # to comment.
Apple users will want whatever apple tell them to want
Short answer : no.
Long answer : noooooooooooooooo.
Yall remember google glasses? Seems like a decade ago.
There was a hilarious few week period in 2013 where I saw multiple people slam into the handrails and doors on muni busses in SF while glassed out. Also people yelling at them about not consenting to being recorded etc but that was much less amusing. Within a couple weeks you entirely stopped seeing them in public spaces.
Yep. I remember their users being called ‘glassholes’ too.
Apple Vision users new nik?: ISores
I can’t imagine walking around in public with something like this Apple headset on, let alone with the insane price tag… which means that people are definitely going to do it.
No for one simple reason: I have a wife. We like to experience content together (watching movies/TV, playing games). None of which I can do without not one but two of these things. No thanks.
It’s funny how obvious this point is and yet it seems to be getting kind of quietly ignored.
I’ve heard a lot of pundits excitedly talking about using this headset to get rid of TVs in their house. I keep wondering how they think that’ll go over with their families.
Headsets already feel outdated. They seem inconvenient, uncomfortable, and take you away from life instead of enhancing it. Whatever happened to google glass? I disliked that for many reasons but at least it wasn’t a headset.
Google happened to it. Right when some of us started doing practical things with it. Still haven’t forgiven them for that.
Can’t have a product potentially get past the early adopters phase can they.
I still don’t think I should have told them I was working on a software prosthetic for it.
Oh, what is that?
I was writing code for Google Glass that implemented facial recognition. A friend of mine suffered a TBI in an automobile wreck and developed partial facial prosopagnosia as a result. I was basically writing software that would recognize faces within 15 feet of the wearer and compare it to images of their contacts in their Google account, and would throw up an AR subtitle identifying the person on a match. Not too long after I filed the developer applications and outlined my project, the Glass project flatlined.
Did you end up taking it anywhere from there?
Robert Scoble took a shower in one and the Google Glass image has yet to recover
Oh dear, I had forgotten about this…
For all the faults Google glass had, at least they were similar in size to regular glasses. I would only consider these things if they were as non-intrusive as possible, aka not ski goggles
I don’t even want to wear clothes half the time never mind a giant computer that’s tracking my eyeballs.
No. Absolutely not.
No one talks about how bad it is to have tons of little LEDs in your eyes. My eyes are already messed up, and I can’t use VR for more than an hour before I feel like I want to die. So it’s a HARD pass from people like me. Talk to me once you put screens in the walls, not on them.
I hope this trend won’t last. My smartphone consumption is too high already.
smartphone consumption
Smartphones Georg, who lives in cave & eats over 10,000 smartphones each day, is an outlier adn should not have been counted
It wouldn’t be bad if it were more of a computer replacement. Than a smart phone replacement. Today, I was extremely cramped with screen space and this headset would have been great! But I’ll just buy a bigger desk and a laptop stand for like 5% the cost.
I think the end goal would be AR/VR built into your glasses that are as light as current day glasses. We are probably a long time away from that, but I feel like most VR headsets right now are beta versions of this end goal.
“a long time” probably means like a decade for this kind of stuff, so at least there’s that to look forward to
Nope
No. The future of tech should be about getting more capabilities out of fewer (and/or less intrusive) screens. Would love to see more advances in e-ink displays and open-source, ‘ambient’ voice-controlled UIs.
oh no. I hate voice controlled tech. it’s off for me. I would not use that at all.
Agreed. I don’t want to use voice controls for anything but I agree with the OPs more general point of getting more capabilities out of fewer screens
I don’t see any downside at all if it’s layered on top of some other (very capable) keyboard-driven UI that can do all the same things.
I don’t see any downside at all if it’s layered on top of some other (very capable) keyboard-driven UI that can do all the same things.
The downside is that no existing tech company has enough self-control to actually keep these kinds of recordings private.
That’s why we need something open-source and self-hosted.
Several such solutions already exist. Problem is, only folks like us mess around with it. Non-geeks, not so much.
@gzrrt @pineapple Yeah - ideally, any voice control processing or recordings should never leave the device it’s used on. At worst, the local network.
It’s so annoying that the tech for voice recognition became usable before mobile processing power caught up but after mobile bandwidth was enough to offload the processing to someone else’s computer.
there doesn’t need to be a keyboard. just good hand gestures which can’t be performed by accident, and good face recognition software. if apple headset will have this, I’m gonna bankrupt.
Don’t think anything can actually replace the power and expressiveness of keyboards and text interfaces- that’s always going to be the bottom layer for a productive setup (i.e., you need to actually be able to write code, write shell scripts etc to control your machine, etc).
Guess what I really want is just some kind of Unix machine that hums along 24/7 in the background, with many different paradigms for interacting with it when you don’t have (or want) a standard keyboard and display. Putting a display over my face feels like a giant leap in the wrong direction
yeah, keyboard is crucial when you want to code, 100% agree here.
I got to try messing around with a Hololens a couple of years back. The hand tracking wasn’t perfect but it was pretty cool. It read my “typing in the air” gestures to set a WPA2 key very accurately (much to my surprise). The parameters of the demo I was playing around in (picking up and moving virtual packages around in a model city to control drones flying around that part of the convention center) was pretty cool.
If the technology was to become widespread it would have to do better than “silly digital ski goggles” anyway. I wear glasses, I wouldn’t mind slightly bulkier glasses if in exchange I can get a heads-up display telling me what the name of that person who’s greeting me that I should totally know the name of but have forgotten right now.
I’m the other way on this one. The idea of having an always-on HUD, while convenient, seems far more dystopian than a nifty toy to watch immersive movies on and play interesting games on when I get home. I know it’s an unpopular opinion around here, but I for one am excited to see computing take on different HIDs. The thought of an infinitely large canvas to compute on appeals to me, while an always-with-me wearable does not.
I like having a disproportionately powerful computing device at home. When I’m out, I’ll bring my analogue watch and an outdated smartphone to text people and read articles. When I’m computing, I go all out. When I’m not, I’m not.
That’s why when Google revealed the Glasses I thought “that’s it, that’s the headwear device that will be the future, it’s literally just glasses!”.
Alas, I should have known back then there was one thing going against that device’s survival odds: it was a project from project slayer, Google.
