http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2015/01/hands-on-with-hololens-making-the-virtual-real/ (http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2015/01/hands-on-with-hololens-making-the-virtual-real/)
Truth be told I'm much more interested in AR than VR. Whilst VR will be cool for gaming and entertainment, AR has the potential to be a genuine cognitive upgrade, integrating our meatware with cloud AI much more tightly than screens and keyboard allow.
The acquisition of minecraft makes a lot more sense now
I do like that they show their product being used exclusively in private homes and offices, not wandering around town like a douche.
That application sounds like fun, but I'm still waiting for the technology that translates subvocalizations to readable text so that we can have functional telepathy. Phone texting approaches it, but isn't quite there.
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on January 23, 2015, 06:48:34 AM
That application sounds like fun, but I'm still waiting for the technology that translates subvocalizations to readable text so that we can have functional telepathy. Phone texting approaches it, but isn't quite there.
Sounds like voodoo to me. Last I heard they were still working on vocal-vocalizations. The last couple of years have covered a lot of ground on that front but there's still a ways to go in understanding context and following conversational threads. Are you talking about some research you know or is the subvocalization thing still strictly scifi?
Quote from: Faust on January 22, 2015, 10:15:11 AM
The acquisition of minecraft makes a lot more sense now
Maybe one day they'll acquire Google if they established a market for AR business and design products.
Ay Pent, you ever seen a Nintendo DS in operation? Did a lot of what was described in the article but not immersively. Like you would lay down a coded card that would turn the table into a castle for instance.
AR's been around for donkeys but the wearable display is the quantum leap. Not having to reach into your pocket and tap a screen to access your computation will make it seamless. No line of demarcation between meatspace and cyberspace, they'll essentially be the same thing from this point forward.
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on January 23, 2015, 11:06:55 PM
AR's been around for donkeys but the wearable display is the quantum leap. Not having to reach into your pocket and tap a screen to access your computation will make it seamless. No line of demarcation between meatspace and cyberspace, they'll essentially be the same thing from this point forward.
Strange days coming indeed! I can't wait.
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on January 23, 2015, 09:52:09 AM
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on January 23, 2015, 06:48:34 AM
That application sounds like fun, but I'm still waiting for the technology that translates subvocalizations to readable text so that we can have functional telepathy. Phone texting approaches it, but isn't quite there.
Sounds like voodoo to me. Last I heard they were still working on vocal-vocalizations. The last couple of years have covered a lot of ground on that front but there's still a ways to go in understanding context and following conversational threads. Are you talking about some research you know or is the subvocalization thing still strictly scifi?
http://www.researchgate.net/publication/261272927_Signal_processing_advances_for_the_MUTE_sEMG-based_silent_speech_recognition_system
NASA was working on something too, but I have no idea what happened with that.
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on January 24, 2015, 02:37:14 AM
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on January 23, 2015, 09:52:09 AM
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on January 23, 2015, 06:48:34 AM
That application sounds like fun, but I'm still waiting for the technology that translates subvocalizations to readable text so that we can have functional telepathy. Phone texting approaches it, but isn't quite there.
Sounds like voodoo to me. Last I heard they were still working on vocal-vocalizations. The last couple of years have covered a lot of ground on that front but there's still a ways to go in understanding context and following conversational threads. Are you talking about some research you know or is the subvocalization thing still strictly scifi?
http://www.researchgate.net/publication/261272927_Signal_processing_advances_for_the_MUTE_sEMG-based_silent_speech_recognition_system
NASA was working on something too, but I have no idea what happened with that.
Awesome! That would certainly be a game changer. I'm not currently paying much attention to BCI stuff, atm. The last I heard there was some kind of implantable chip but there were problems with the neural connections degrading (scarring?) over time. Non-invasive would definitely seem to be the way to go in the short term.
Just had a thought regarding this subvocalization malarkey. If you take understanding spoken language as a baseline, how far up or down is the fidelity required to grab music I play in my head?
I quite often invent whole bloody symphonies in my mind's ear but lack the dedication to figure out how to write it down in music language and then turn it into out loud shit. Only I get to listen to it. Would be the crown king of epic if I could just record the shit as it happened. Use it as backing tracks for kayaking vids.
Musicians and composers, spitting bullets about how it's just not cricket in 3... 2... 1... :evil:
The main problem is, music in your brain isn't physical sound. The only way that would work is to invent a neuron reader.
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on January 26, 2015, 05:09:28 PM
Just had a thought regarding this subvocalization malarkey. If you take understanding spoken language as a baseline, how far up or down is the fidelity required to grab music I play in my head?
I quite often invent whole bloody symphonies in my mind's ear but lack the dedication to figure out how to write it down in music language and then turn it into out loud shit. Only I get to listen to it. Would be the crown king of epic if I could just record the shit as it happened. Use it as backing tracks for kayaking vids.
Musicians and composers, spitting bullets about how it's just not cricket in 3... 2... 1...
Perhaps if Pentagram would learn to read and fill a musical pentagram :? :fnord:
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on January 26, 2015, 05:54:16 PM
The main problem is, music in your brain isn't physical sound. The only way that would work is to invent a neuron reader.
It seems to be mainly a problem with resolution and neural net density. Presumably those are going to increase over time. The neural nets themselves, I'd put money on. Bloody rapidly if the history of transistors on silicon is anything to go by. FuckifIknow with the brain scanners but it wouldn't surprise me. Maybe some
So once we have the tech in place, we scan at max resoution, umpteen images per second. So you play a known note or sound and then you tell the trainer guy to imagine it just so. Then spit the scanner output in the markov and crosslink the sound/note/tune with the scan.
Eventually you're catching notes and waveforms, then whole sequences of those, then it'll be polyphonic, multi tibral, symphonic... Remember the Moog? First stage - mental Stylophone
tm Did you have those in the states?
It'd get interesting when you were applying enough horsepower
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on January 26, 2015, 05:09:28 PM
Just had a thought regarding this subvocalization malarkey. If you take understanding spoken language as a baseline, how far up or down is the fidelity required to grab music I play in my head?
I quite often invent whole bloody symphonies in my mind's ear but lack the dedication to figure out how to write it down in music language and then turn it into out loud shit. Only I get to listen to it. Would be the crown king of epic if I could just record the shit as it happened. Use it as backing tracks for kayaking vids.
Musicians and composers, spitting bullets about how it's just not cricket in 3... 2... 1... :evil:
Subvocalization is not direct neural activity, so the answer is that the two technologies are completely unrelated. There's this, though: http://www.livescience.com/47708-human-brain-link-sends-thoughts.html
I wouldn't get too excited about it and go making grandiose claims about what it means is possible or likely, though. Leave that to the media.