The future often starts as a toy, so don't shun toy VR this Christmas An acquaintance recently asked if he should buy his child an expensive virtual reality system for Christmas, worried that it would be used for little more than gaming. I put his fears to rest, informing him that simply having an amazing device like that at hand - regardless of how it gets used - changes the way you think. We …
"I learned a lot about how smartphones have become the ‘magic wands’ controlling our physical world"
An accurate observation, though an incomplete one.
The characterisation of smartphones as 'magic wands' gives a sense that the addition of a smart phone brings ease to an existing task - a swipe of the screen and presto! While this is certainly the outward experience of many, the truth is that smartphones are now not just some aid or time-saving device but an integral part of the technologies we are developing.
To many, that might be a great thing, and, skimming through the linked article, it seems that Mark is in that camp.
The problem I see is that smartphones are now becoming essential for operating many modern devices and, while standalone versions still exist, they are likely to become rarer. And, again, many might not see this as a problem but when you consider the inherently connected nature of a smartphone and the continual 'phone-home' behavior of nearly every 'app', coupled with the obscenely lax security of most and the blatant disregard for privacy of nearly all, it adds up to something rather else.
That 'something' is a future where much of our leisure and a fair bit of our daily lives will be only possible by submitting to pervasive monitoring. Not to mention the problem of functionality requiring the assistance of a - sometimes unknown - third-party half a world away. As we saw with 'nest' devices.
What happens when we can no longer use a piece of equipment because one company updated out phone and some essential 'app' no longer works?
Yes, those are all valid points, worthy of concern. However, the article only brought up 'phones as a magic wand' as an analogy, an analogy that still works if we ignore 'IoT' and consider the phone as a replacement for an alarm clock, calculator, road atlas, camera, Walkman, guitar tuner, FM radio, small flashlight etc.
"I fail to see how the geometry works unless you find the headphone jack to be of sufficient diamet.... oh, you said flAshlight. Nevermind."
Ahh but I'm sure that somewhere out there, there is smartphone controlled device of sufficient diameter to encompass your every need!
""I fail to see how the geometry works unless you find the headphone jack to be of sufficient diamet.... oh, you said flAshlight. Nevermind."
Ahh but I'm sure that somewhere out there, there is smartphone controlled device of sufficient diameter to encompass your every need!"
And then your magic wand can interface with your magic wand!
A smartphone can do/be all those things. But not as well as the things themselves. The only advantage that a smartphone has is that it is a barely adequate replacement for lots of things at once.
The one possible exception where it can actually improve on the original thing itself is the "road atlas", as long as you don't mind viewing your maps through a (relatively) tiny window onto the wider cartographical world and actually enjoy all that pinching and swiping just to figure out where you are and how it relates to things (that may or may not be) nearby.
Why were maps always produced on large sheets of paper instead of decks of postcards ?
I think perhaps there is a reason. ;)
But you had better had remembered/thought to download all the data you needed into your device before heading out into the great unconnected wilderness, otherwise all you have is a hand-held device that is not so much "magic wand" as "useless hunk of technology".
Of course, not quite useless. The one HUGE advantage it has is that if you get lost you can play Angry Birds while waiting to be found/rescued. The best you can hope for with a real road atlas is to develop your origami skills.
Oh, or find your own way home of course. :)
I was out shopping yesterday with the other half who wants a cartridge coffee maker for Christmas.
We came across some smartphone controlled Nespresso machines. Really, what is the point? The whole point of a Nespresso machine is that you have to go over to it, put the cartridge in the top, a cup at the bottom and press the button for caffeine based tastiness. How exactly is a phone supposed to enhance a process that requires you to interact physically with the machine? Maybe if it came with a robot that fetched the cup from the cupboard, popped in the capsule and brought me my hot beverage on a silver platter I could understand the point. Am I missing something?
When I was a kid, I played with Lego. As I grew up, I often found myself lacking enough blocks of a given type to complete my projects properly, but I made do with what I had.
Nowadays, I fool around in Minecraft, and the number of blocks is no longer an issue. I introduced my nephew to the game, and it's all he wants to do any more. His constructions are that of the 9-year-old he is, but he is building stuff and that is what is important (in my view).
I do believe I have an active imagination, but VR is a miss for me. I cannot see the advantage of having to move one's head to move the field of view when you're still virtually tied to the chair in front of the PC. Moving the mouse seems a lot easier, and I'm used to that.
On the other hand, the day VR is a full-body suit encased in a sphere where you actually experience walking around endlessly (or frantically running from enemies) because you don't move in the sphere, then yes, I can totally see the interest of the VR and I will be right there, waiting for my next exercise session with my heart beating with anticipation. That kind of VR system will undoubtedly transform geeks and computer nerds into the spitting image of muscular Greek statues, with hormones, better than any gym room could possibly hope to.
So, for the good of couch-potatoes everywhere, please bring on the VR Sphere. It's a question of national health, after all.
When I was a kid, I played with Lego. As I grew up, I often found myself lacking enough blocks of a given type to complete my projects properly, but I made do with what I had.
Nowadays, I fool around in Minecraft, and the number of blocks is no longer an issue. I introduced my nephew to the game, and it's all he wants to do any more. His constructions are that of the 9-year-old he is, but he is building stuff and that is what is important (in my view).
Making do with what you have - that is, achieving the objective whilst operating within constraints - is an important skill to learn. Having infinite resources is, ultimately, boring.
The Vive already has a the "room scale" addon that tracks the headset in 3D space and allows a limited amount of movement around a room. Tracking jumping, ducking and crouching is already working. MS Hololens is well on its way on fast, nearly instantanious room mapping. Combining the tech could mean actualy moving around becomes possible.
3D treadmills, hamsterballs and all the other solutions only work for some people and are never the same as actually walking because of the difference in accelerations on the inner ear.
"3D treadmills, hamsterballs and all the other solutions only work for some people and are never the same as actually walking because of the difference in accelerations on the inner ear."
Yep, all we need to perfect are forcefields, tractor beams (which can pull too) and maybe artificial gravity adjustment in any direction. Simples!
".... I put his fears to rest, informing him that simply having an amazing device like that at hand - regardless of how it gets used - changes the way you think."
My kids have been to a dark skies area and seen the milky way in all it's glory; explored inside caves, seen a dam in full flood, done long runs for charity, ride their bikes, climb trees, do sports, toasted marsh mellows on an open campfire, ran into the sea in mid December and on and on.
I did all that for less than any decent, soon to be obsolete, VR kit.
In 30 years time, I know what they would remember most.
Signed Grumpy Dad.
I did all those outdoor activities too when I was a child, and I'm very glad I did. However, I still have fond memories of waiting for Sinclair computers loading, playing two-player games on an Atari ST, and later playing networked Doom - as well as using these computers as paint brushes and musical instruments.
These groups of activities aren't mutually exclusive. For sure, young people today are offered more polished, more immersive games, but at the same time there is potential for greater links between the virtual and physical spaces. Examples of these links might include: Making your own toys with sensors, motors and Arduinos, Augmented Reality (as a toy, but also as a tool in the workshop), and Machine Vision. As an adult, the 'toys' that appeal most to me now are on the border of the virtual and physical - such as CNC routers.
Finding a good balance is in part a matter of parental guidance, and it sound that despite your grumpiness, your children are lucky to have you as a father.
>I wish I'd had the money to do all that.
It's more to do with where you live, and not how much money you have per se - though obviously money and employment have a huge bearing on where you call home. Trees, streams and beaches cost nothing - travelling to them might do.
To someone brought up in a small town or village, raising a child in a city just looks cruel.
Another link - my 'techno hippy' friend in North Devon built himself a rotating observatory, and in the mid nineties constructed a CCD imaging system for it. Digital imaging was no match for film for everyday applications then, but for for stargazing CCDs offer some advantages such as compositing images to compensate for partial cloud cover. I remember him telling me he used some laser-pointers down the telescope to find the correct location to mount the sensor. Now in his sixties, he plays with racing drones - indeed, he's hosted regional championships, including one in which a world champion has qualified. Really though, it has more in common with the 1980's outdoor activity of RC car racing than it does video games.
"A cheap VR can bring many of these things to those who could never actually go to these places."
No, a VR gives you a shallow impression of what it like.
Most of those things are free and require little more than a cheap tent and the petrol and a train fare.
That friend must be loaded if they are considering giving a child an expensive VR system, which many adults couldn't even afford to justify for themselves, let alone a child!
Mobile phone VR is an insulting joke; decent VR currently looks to cost thousands of pounds on a high end, gaming desktop computer, a proper VR headset with 3D specific controllers (£659 in Currys just for a HTC Vive!). The HTC Vive looks like it still needs work and needs a significant 3m by 3m of clear floor space e.g. a large bedroom or lounge with wall mounts!
Most toys should be relatively cheap so that you can still afford to buy more of the same or different toys e.g. a Raspberry Pi or Ardino and bits rather than expensive VR kit. Technology can change a lot in just five years, so a child's tech. toys can rapidly become obsolete, as I've discovered repeatedly as an adult too!
Creative play is fine, but consumption tech., including games, can become an expensive and/or stupefying trap for children and adults. See the book "Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business" by Neil Postman.
Structuring our work and our lives around play is a nice idea, but requires a supportive environment including finance, spare mental energy, time and autonomy which can be really difficult as an employee, especially if your work is silo-ed and it, perpetual tech. catchup, research and other life stuff saps your mental energy. Academics and writers can seem rather cheeky with some of their suggestions given they probably have more freedom than most people, who have to produce work to meet bottom line targets for business.
or maybe it will be just as big as all of those 3D TV's we're still using. Sharing content in these systems does not work so it will always be a single user experience. I'm not seeing the advantage of a 3D screen over a 2D screen other than in games or niche enterprise areas such as engineering, product design or architecture.
While people live in 3D we like to operate and represent things in 2D as it is a simplification and an abstraction of the complex. If we all preferred to operate in 3D art history would not be overwhelmingly full of artists rather than sculptors.
I disagree about Alexa and other so-called AIs (Siri, Cortana, whatever the Google one is called this week). They're about as smart as a 1980s text-adventure game:
"Alexa, where did I leave my glasses?"
"Bilbo heads north and is eaten by a troll."
Maybe in a few years they'll be better. But today I can't just say "Alexa, when is the next train to Barnsley?"; instead I have to say "Alexa, Launch National Rail app, go to Live Departures, go to my home station, query next departure to Barnsley"; and then it has the cheek to ask "Did you mean Barnstaple?". I exaggerate, but not by much.
These things are worse than mere toys. At least toys are fun for five minutes before getting bored of them. AIs are frustrating for several hours, before you go back to turning the lights off with a flick of the switch.
Yes, everyday tech often starts as a toy. Motorcars are a good example*. However, I do have some reservations about VR:
1. Innovative tech becomes successful everyday tech when it adds some kind of value for a large number of people. Like making some task easier or simply affordable. In my view VR will always be a highly specialised niche product.
2. I've been waiting for consumer-grade VR that actually delivers on all it's promises roughly as long as I've been waiting for the paperless office...
* Tech Trivia Time: in 1896 Charles Rolls bought his first car. Some 10 years later he gave up motorcars as a hobby because he got bored. For him a road trip that was fun was a trip with him spending half of the time fixing something. So he started getting involved in aviation, which sadly led to becoming the first Briton to be killed in an aeronautical accident with a powered aircraft in 1910.
I've been interested in VR for a long time, and it was god awful for a long time. Then Oculus came along and I got a DK2, their second development kit, and it was ok as a seated experience, there were a bunch of interesting demos and some things were actually pretty fun, using a program called Vorpx I experienced Portal 2 and Half-Life 2 in VR and that was quite good. Then the HTC Vive was announced, and there were a bunch of Youtube gamers trying them out, having the ability to walk around your room and have your hands present with the Vive wand controllers seemed to make a huge difference so I put in a pre-order. I have to say, even with limited resolution and field of view it is enough to really make you feel like you're somewhere else, if you search on Youtube for Brookhaven Experiment, you'll see people actually freaking out as they are attacked by zombies in VR. I didn't freak out playing Brookhaven, but I felt genuine fear and my adrenaline pumping, even though I knew it was just a game. I would highly recommend that anyone try a demo at one of the Curries stores that have demos or where ever they can even if they have no interest in buying one as experiencing it is really the only way to understand that we are just at the edge of something new.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
