4 ms·

The article addresses this exact question.

by NickM 3y ago

tempestn 3y ago
Though the comments also address using boots instead of an external device, but then don't consider that in the context of the arguments against a larger space.
thatsjusthard 3y ago
Mostly it says it’s hard and the machine would have to be big. So? Same for galvanic whatever. “It would be hard to make it so precise as to not make you sick”. Ok, try hard then.
- ffsm8 3y ago
  Okay, let's think this through. - a large area is necessary - the machinery is going to be extremely expensive - it's still going to be a subpar experience as the virtual area will never be fully represented unless you remove vegetation, cliffs etc - it needs to be supported by the software (which nobody will, because there is no market for it) If you now make a venn diagram that represents all people potentially interested in this, you end up at pretty much 0. Thus, it doesn't work.
  - _nalply 3y ago
    More points. - our equilibrium sense in the inner ear is very sensitive to velocity changes - the machinery only fools for steady velocities or small velocity changes - turns in walking imply strong velocity changes The effect is that we tend to counterbalance the velocity changes but because the machinery cannot simulate velocity changes, counterbalancing makes us fall. If that gadget manages to sell expect many hilarious videos of people falling on their noses or butts. Exactly like for the treadmill. Note how people always fall if they assume a velocity change (like starting to run by jumping on a running treadmill). I always laugh when the treadmill then sends people off. It's hilarious. Perhaps with some tilting platform the velocity changes can be emulated. Whenever the person changes the direction of the walk, the tilting platform tilts in the opposite direction of the velocity change. Let's say a person walks to the right and suddenly walks to the left. The velocity change vector points to the left. The platform will tilt to the right. This is difficult to get right. Probably latencies of more than five milliseconds will irritate our equilibrium organ I think. Software should be fast enough but the platform has to move swiftly. And even this is not enough. There will be rotation in the tilting. Some sensitive people will feel sick. And the quickly moving platform is dangerous. A bug (wrong sign of the vector) and the platform kicks people off it. Or some body part gets below the platform and the crush is strong enough to grievously hurt people.
    - thatsjusthard 3y ago
      > And the quickly moving platform is dangerous. A bug (wrong sign of the vector) and the platform kicks people off it. Or some body part gets below the platform and the crush is strong enough to grievously hurt people. Ski lifts are a thing. People mostly are fine with the risk. All these comments are basically nomad level rejections.

The article addresses this exact question.

by NickM 3y ago

The article addresses this exact question.

Though the comments also address using boots instead of an external device, but then don't consider that in the context of the arguments against a larger space.

thatsjusthard 3y ago

Mostly it says it’s hard and the machine would have to be big. So? Same for galvanic whatever. “It would be hard to make it so precise as to not make you sick”. Ok, try hard then.

ffsm8 3y ago
Okay, let's think this through. - a large area is necessary - the machinery is going to be extremely expensive - it's still going to be a subpar experience as the virtual area will never be fully represented unless you remove vegetation, cliffs etc - it needs to be supported by the software (which nobody will, because there is no market for it) If you now make a venn diagram that represents all people potentially interested in this, you end up at pretty much 0. Thus, it doesn't work.
- _nalply 3y ago
  More points. - our equilibrium sense in the inner ear is very sensitive to velocity changes - the machinery only fools for steady velocities or small velocity changes - turns in walking imply strong velocity changes The effect is that we tend to counterbalance the velocity changes but because the machinery cannot simulate velocity changes, counterbalancing makes us fall. If that gadget manages to sell expect many hilarious videos of people falling on their noses or butts. Exactly like for the treadmill. Note how people always fall if they assume a velocity change (like starting to run by jumping on a running treadmill). I always laugh when the treadmill then sends people off. It's hilarious. Perhaps with some tilting platform the velocity changes can be emulated. Whenever the person changes the direction of the walk, the tilting platform tilts in the opposite direction of the velocity change. Let's say a person walks to the right and suddenly walks to the left. The velocity change vector points to the left. The platform will tilt to the right. This is difficult to get right. Probably latencies of more than five milliseconds will irritate our equilibrium organ I think. Software should be fast enough but the platform has to move swiftly. And even this is not enough. There will be rotation in the tilting. Some sensitive people will feel sick. And the quickly moving platform is dangerous. A bug (wrong sign of the vector) and the platform kicks people off it. Or some body part gets below the platform and the crush is strong enough to grievously hurt people.
  - thatsjusthard 3y ago
    > And the quickly moving platform is dangerous. A bug (wrong sign of the vector) and the platform kicks people off it. Or some body part gets below the platform and the crush is strong enough to grievously hurt people. Ski lifts are a thing. People mostly are fine with the risk. All these comments are basically nomad level rejections.