[FoRK] [Tech] Goggles, or Projectors?

[Eugen Leitl]

On Thu, Jan 03, 2008 at 11:49:21AM -0600, Jeff Bone wrote:

> Don't forget, the original idea behind Company 1.5 (Activerse) was  
> ultimately to build a Second Life-alike, and trying to sell others on  
> the practical benefits thereof.  So I'm not inherently antagonistic  

I think the hardware just only very recently got there. I don't
do noisy hardware on principle, and my current setup is barely
usable (Windlight client), given rather pathetic in-game physics.

It would be interesting to see how e.g. OpenSim fares on a LAN,
with a modern quadcore and a decent video accelerator for the client.

> to this idea...  I not only used to drink the Kool-Aid, I used to  
> sell it.  I'm just no longer sure that there's REALLY any practical,  
> productive benefit of having such a meeting in 2L vs. e.g. an n-way  

I prefer a little more anonymity (pardon me curmugdeonly misanthrope). 
Even if I had a full head and facial expression tracker (comes free
with a video feed, I know) I'd cloak certain things.

Ability to build scripted 3d structures is unprecedented, though.
And I'm also not too hot on proprietary stuff which only does
PowerPoint.

> video chat.  (I probably have heard, if not invented, most of the  
> arguments for such benefits, but if you've got something novel in  
> that regard I'd love to hear it.)

I don't, actually. It's just SL works for me, while video conferences
cum PowerPoints don't. I'm not nearly enough suit for that.
 
> No, but I'd like to.

It's too bad the Linux client doesn't do it yet, and you're only
controlling the camera, not the avatar.
 
> Remote control of UxVs (or generally, embodied telepresence) is  

I'm really looking forward to a head and face tracker which could
do it from a single or two cameras. There's even a simple ToF
tracker which can be eventually built into display panels.

> specifically one of the *actual* practical apps to which I was  
> referring.
> 
> >>than entertainment --- the range of practical applications is rather
> >>surprisingly limited.  Augmented reality, on the other hand...
> >
> >Both are immensely useful.
> 
> I'm not sure they are equally useful, but I'm also not passionate  
> enough about that position to quibble too much.

Well, we do have a poor man's VRs (SL, games) but AR is limited
to military and high-end vehicular HUDs.
 
> >Most of us have been waiting for both
> >since mid-1980s. It's pathetic how little has happened since.
> 
> +1 on that, me as much if not more than anybody else here.
> 
> Hell, at least I made a run at that fence. ;-)

I hope it was fun. I never had the chance.

-- 
Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE