3 ms·

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 the

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.

smoldesu 5y ago
> 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 5y ago
  > 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.
suifbwish 5y ago
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 5y ago
  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 5y ago

> 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 5y ago
> 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.

suifbwish 5y ago

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 5y ago
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.