A can of worms.... opened...
 

http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/pa...xth_sense.html

Whooo... uhhh... wait a minute... that means...

This is another step towards the thing I'm always talking about. The demo in the video gets interesting at 4:02 (this device is better than Microsoft Surface because it works on any surface, including just holding out the palm of your own hand to dial a phone number etc.) and again at 5:02 (where they explain, how does this device help you at the grocery store).

But they don't explain how the visual recognition engine works, i.e. how does this thing know who or what it is looking at? That crucial step right there is what has always been needed in order to, for instance, take a digital picture of a plant and upload it to a website that tells you what it is and whether it's poisonous (the thing my dad said they should have when I was talking about the other thing).

Very cool device, and the presenter has the good humor to quip "We'll be back next year with the 6th sense brain implant..."

But. But. I don't want to see dead people.

OMG. If I can have this thing, I'd be willing to forgive them for failing to deliver me a flying car yet.

Can I be the usual meh-sayer? All this stuff falls into a category of neat, but not something people really want.

Do I want to take an imprecise picture by holding my hands in a square? No, I prefer to compose it properly with a viewfinder, and if I care about the image I want to review it immediately, with a small LCD screen.

Phone number on your hand, do not want! I can take the time to pull out the phone to get that one exact. Speech recognition for calling is getting better too. I just want a contact list that doesn't go away when the device needs to be replaced with one from a different company.

Minority report interface, I guess so! But is it better, or just different? I notice that they only demo certain things on white walls, indoor, which I guess we have in abundance at home, not so much in public. Better than a crisp LCD touchscreen? Only in that you don't have to pull it out of your pocket. Otherwise, you have to paint your nails four different colors or walk around with rubber bands on your fingers. What is multiple-finger interface really good for? Enlarging things seems to be the biggest use so far. I guess there will be more innovation on that in future... maybe...

Which toilet paper is most ecological? Don't care, so now you've built an interface for a feature that you wanted, not that I wanted.

Also, privacy? You're sharing your info lookup with everybody around you. You don't want that and neither does everybody around you.

And? If I'm meeting you for the first time, and the first thing you do is Google me on a nearby wall? Or project a word-tag of my blog (which I don't have) on my shirt? Sorry, you're an asshole, so we don't really need to meet. Besides, isn't your mirror-projector going to conflict with my mirror-projector? Sending infinite blasts of information all over the place?

Its just like that episode of Paradox I'm always talking about.

Maybe you didn't notice, this is a proof-of-concept prototype built in three months by a college student with $350 of off-the-shelf parts. It's not a finished product and this is not a marketing video to "sell" you on marketable features.

Nevertheless, on 03-08-2008, you asked Dwellars to consider the following:
Isn't the device they built here exactly the kind of thing that could do that? Didn't you, yourself ask for this device to be developed? Granted, you have to strecth your imagination far enough to imagine that the platform that could rate one type of product on one type of criteria would be capable of the impossible, science-fiction task of :::gasp::: obtaining other types of informtaion about other types of things.

I think UT's request could be more easily satisfied by a smart phone or a netbook.

...that magically hops out of your pocket and takes a picture of the item and looks it up and then gives you the report. Right. We're talking about developing human interfaces, not "what information is available"

I'm not downplaying the possibility of a leap forward in human interface.

But the problems that need to be solved are non-trivial and won't be coming any time soon.

In the mean time, I'd be perfectly satisfied if I could point my phone at the back of the book to scan the bar code which would look up the book at Amazon or Borders.

It's true, but I'm thinking it more likely that my phone can scan the UPC code than this device can flawlessly recognize a book cover. Now they have decided we want the number of stars on the cover, and a little more information on the inside page. That's not what I wanted, I wanted the Amazon reviews. And not just of books, but of everything sold at Amazon. And actually I didn't want just the reviews, I want the related items, the link to see everything by this manufacturer, and the % of people who bought other things after looking at this product page.

dar, there ya go (UPC code scan)

I think the phone manufacturers will work out the details faster than these guys. Like I said, it's cool, butit's not what I really wanted.

Or, that's what they had time to make it do in order to get a 5 minute demo video ready for the TED conference. I'm making the assumption that we're capable of applying a little imagination here (i.e. what features could be programmed into such a device?) and you are proving me wrong. And that is the crux of the technological hurdle here that they haven't explained:

Plus, the toolmaker isn't always the best craftsman. If they can get a foothold with gimmicky stuff, the "killer app" could come out of somewhere else.

This is one I care about. Not ecological traits, but I'd like to know which products have hidden allergens in them. Granted, that assumes that information is out there in an accessible place to begin with, but there are already several services that do this in book format.

Isn't that something you should do at home instead of blocking the aisle in the damn store... like the people calling their SO to find out what they should buy because they didn't make a fucking list. :mad:

Flintos, The whole thing is do we want a projection system we interact with, is that going to be the way of the future? Or is it going to be a better version of what we already have: a small mobile device with a bright, beautiful display we interact with. It's the projection system I'm the most meh about; every projection system I've ever seen is weak, only usable in certain light, and very imprecise. Take it outdoors and it's useless, and I'm wagering there ain't a damn thing you can do about that, because you have to fight the light of the sun.

And "works on every surface" is probably not going to fly either, because it has to be the right color to interact with your colored fingers, and has to be relatively flat in order to do some of the things you'll want to do. You can project a button onto a toilet paper roll, but you can't sort your projected photos on one, nor can you look up the toilet paper allergen website for more information.

Maybe special glasses would do the trick.

The projection system seems stupid, yes. But think about this...

I have always imagined the ideal peripheral to a human-integrated information system to be some type of heads-up display. That is a great way to present information, layered "on top" of the real-world environment, but what can't it do? It isn't an INUPUT device (unless you added some eye tracking capability).

What does the clunky, prototype "6th sense" device do? It combines an input AND an output system "on top" of the real world environment. Input and output is accomplished, from the user's perspective in one "place" (you don't have to type on an input device , a keyboard, and also look at an output device, a monitor) and furthermore, this "place" is the world--the actual, real world you are walking around in. In order to do this, it has to involve the dubious technique of creating a feedback loop between a projection system and a visual recognition engine (the details of which we are wholely ignorant of at this point).

Take a step back from the details, the specifics, and think about the idea here (what, in my mind, this demo was designed to communicate). A human-integrated interface that layers itself "on top" of the real world, and allows seamless input and output, out there in front of your eyes--where we have been looking at things, and doing stuff to things, for millions of years. Compare this to our recent habit of pulling little boxes out of our pocket and punching little buttons on them. THAT, my friend, is not the way to go. That is a stopgap that will be archaic soon.

They may not have solved the problem here, but they have realized the correct idea. This is the TED Conference - "ideas worth spreading" ...

Well OK, you're closer to convincing me.

The two holdups will be pattern recognition and sunlight. Both are really amazingly difficult. Right now, it can't locate the tip of your index finger of your right hand, unless you have a pen cap on it.

What we'll have next is the ability to ask questions via speech recognition. That system allows you to leave the phone in your pocket (as does the TED prototype, which costs $350 but requires $350 worth of phone). You press a button on your earpiece and ask it: What is my checking account balance? It states the answer through your earpiece.

How do you ask that question of this system? Hold up your empty wallet and draw a question mark?

Here's the prototype that you can use right now. It can only answer certain kinds of questions, and it can only answer them via screen, but you know they'll be branching that out, just as soon as they've used this system to hone their speech recognition with a broad spectrum of users.



Oh and also Compare this to our recent habit of pulling little boxes out of our pocket and punching little buttons on them? We're past buttons now, we're touching the screens of high-quality motion-sensing displays...

I don't like that one because it can only tell you about the Golden Gate Bridge and the size of giant squids. And you have to wear a blue shirt.

In theory, yes. But consider that there are, say, 200 brands of spaghetti sauce sold in this country, 50 of them are gluten-free, and my grocery store carries 15. Cross-checking the two lists requires me to either already know which 15 brands my store stocks so I can check them before I get there, or to carry a list of the 50 so I can reference it while standing in front of the shelf.

(instant thread reactivation)

Holy fucking shit alert! Google just gave us we wanted.

http://www.google.com/mobile/goggles

You're at the Sydney Opera House and you want to know more about it. Take a picture of it. Google figures out what you just shot and tells you the detail.

You're in a bookstore and you want the full Amazon information on a book. Take a picture of the cover...

Somebody gives you their business card. Now you have to put their details in your contacts. Of course not, just take a picture of the card...

You're in front of a local restaurant and you want ratings and reviews for it... just point your phone at it, the GPS knows where you are and can fetch details.

Sure, you can take a picture of the UPC code... or the label on the bottle... more and more things will just "work" if you ask Google.

And soon, do you want to know what kind of tree that is? Take a picture of the leaf...

The pertinent question has already been asked by Flint, what to do with all this magic? - when there is more magic every day.

Holy Fucking Shit!
 

Just gimme a tricorder already.

There is also an app for iPhone called Redlaser that allows you to take a pic of a UPC and get info, including numerous online sales prices, on your phone lickity split.

We are closer to the infocalypse.

I love TED. They always have fun stuff.

Google Goggles update: now it translates.

http://googlemobile.blogspot.com/201...th-google.html

More apps needing a better human interfaces here.

Y'know those sci-fi movies where aliens come to earth and for good or bad decide to become a corporation and slowly release their technology........

...er, what?

I can't think of any movies offhand, but it's a premise of "Earth: Final Conflict" and "V".

I think it might have figured into the sequel to Battlefield Earth if it hadn't been so awful that even Scientologists couldn't get the sequel greenlit. But it's been a while since I've read the book.

Anyway...

Google's got this one.

Wait, you mean that wasn't part of the April Fool's release?

Want.

Why would he need a book about learning the ukelele when he has cool internet glasses to teach him?

Better yet, just pay some other guy who can alredy play the ukulele to put the glasses on and let the girlfriend think it's him.

Think how that might change on line dating services.:eyebrow:

Cyrano eBergerac

What's better than some clunky, stupid-looking goggles?
THE END OF SMARTPHONES: Here's A Computer Screen On A Contact Lens

That's neat, but it's short-term thinking.
Why convert electronic data to light and then back into electronic neurotransmitters?

Long-term thinking... retina implants... electronic to neuro... in one step

Why risk the retina? USB port connecting straight to the frontal lobes.

And soon ever word, the most casual action and most personal thoughts will be monitored, aggregated, and tracked. 1984, pff amateurs .