4 ms·

Hi, I'm not sure what you think eviscerated me. My information is factual. I try to answer all responses but I am getting a LOT responses and I may have misse

by kguttag 10y ago

Hi, I'm not sure what you think eviscerated me. My information is factual. I try to answer all responses but I am getting a LOT responses and I may have missed some at reddit. It is best to go to the comment section on my site. It turns out that Magic Leap does use Mico-OLED in one of its prototype, but they are also using DLPs and LCOS. My subsequent posts point this out. I warned people that it was just a hunch. I kept my stake in eMagin at least for the time being, but as I said it was a small stake for me. BTW, my website is down right now. I found out that there was a lot of traffic from Hacker News while trying to see what was going on which is what brought me here. I'm on hold with tech support right now.

cma 10y ago
>I'm not sure what you think eviscerated me. After he showed you the caption on the images all you came back with was a statement (via an edit to your post) that the first image was still an "artists concept" (it isn't, highlighting the projector's field of view and pointing out that it was done in the caption isn't anything like an "artist's concept"). And then for the second image you said it "might be real." That means you are essentially accusing the researchers and saying they "might" be faking the second image and committing research fraud. Their caption says, "the bottom photo is unaltered." (shameless edit: I have VR and mixed-reality experience including relighting the real-world with game-engine lighting. If any Magic Leap guys are browsing the thread and looking for third party content devs or recruiting, send an email to mljobcandidate@gmail.com!)
- jv22222 10y ago
  +1 for the hustle and, yes, I'm expecting down votes ;)
- kguttag 10y ago
  You are shameless alright. OK, I was answering a lot of questions that day and I went to the direct links the person gave to the jpeg images and not the paper. The first one was obviously altered but the picture I saw did not have the caption. Same for the second, I never saw the caption or that paper before I went back to check tonight. As for speckle, it would not have shown up in the low resolution pictures. It might also not be there due to the vibrating fiber (some types of vibration will essentially eliminate speckle but usually it has to be the screen that is vibrate). BTW, my website may be down for a while.
  - dang 10y ago
    > You are shameless alright You're of course welcome to comment here, but HN commenters are required to remain civil and substantive, and especially to refrain from personal attacks. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html
    - kguttag 10y ago
      The person implied I was a shameless, a liar, and that I was eviscerated. I was just using his words back.
      - kbenson 10y ago
        No, they stated you may be biased and were eviscerated (which I interpreted to mean your views were throughly disproven). They laid out evidence that they believe points to you being wrong. Their postscript regarding being shameless is a self depreciation that applies to their self promotion, not you. It's a fairly factual and benign set of comments to my eyes.
      - cma 10y ago
        My use of shameless referred to me.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

by kguttag 10y ago

cma 10y ago

>I'm not sure what you think eviscerated me. After he showed you the caption on the images all you came back with was a statement (via an edit to your post) that the first image was still an "artists concept" (it isn't, highlighting the projector's field of view and pointing out that it was done in the caption isn't anything like an "artist's concept"). And then for the second image you said it "might be real." That means you are essentially accusing the researchers and saying they "might" be faking the second image and committing research fraud. Their caption says, "the bottom photo is unaltered." (shameless edit: I have VR and mixed-reality experience including relighting the real-world with game-engine lighting. If any Magic Leap guys are browsing the thread and looking for third party content devs or recruiting, send an email to mljobcandidate@gmail.com!)

jv22222 10y ago
+1 for the hustle and, yes, I'm expecting down votes ;)
kguttag 10y ago
You are shameless alright. OK, I was answering a lot of questions that day and I went to the direct links the person gave to the jpeg images and not the paper. The first one was obviously altered but the picture I saw did not have the caption. Same for the second, I never saw the caption or that paper before I went back to check tonight. As for speckle, it would not have shown up in the low resolution pictures. It might also not be there due to the vibrating fiber (some types of vibration will essentially eliminate speckle but usually it has to be the screen that is vibrate). BTW, my website may be down for a while.
- dang 10y ago
  > You are shameless alright You're of course welcome to comment here, but HN commenters are required to remain civil and substantive, and especially to refrain from personal attacks. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html
  - kguttag 10y ago
    The person implied I was a shameless, a liar, and that I was eviscerated. I was just using his words back.
    - kbenson 10y ago
      No, they stated you may be biased and were eviscerated (which I interpreted to mean your views were throughly disproven). They laid out evidence that they believe points to you being wrong. Their postscript regarding being shameless is a self depreciation that applies to their self promotion, not you. It's a fairly factual and benign set of comments to my eyes.
    - cma 10y ago
      My use of shameless referred to me.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]