I think that there's a presumption (that I've shared) that Magic Leap is trying to make AR goggles or glasses. But, as has been extensively commented upon in the past, that's just crazy. We're just barely at the point of doing semi-decent VR (Oculus Rift) and just barely at the point of doing semi-decent wearable heads-up displays (Google Glass). The idea that Magic Leap could in any foreseeable timeframe create a device that has all the virtues of the Rift + Glass + A huge dose of additional technology on top of both is just laughable.
But if they're trying for something much heavier-weight, like the ability to create convincing illusions not in the form-factor of "some goggles," but rather, "a specially prepared room and table," then that's maybe a little more realistic -- and of course less obviously revolutionary.
An "optical table" is to optical technologies as a solderless breadboard is to electronics.
Basically, it's a big, stable platform with lots of threaded holes of a standard size and pitch for attaching lasers, mirrors, etc. Most have some kind of pneumatic isolation or damping to keep vibrations from being transmitted from the floor. Things like interference phenomena are sensitive to displacements of a few nanometers, so you really don't want things like passing trucks to ruin your experiments!
Examples here: http://www.newport.com/Optical-Table-Selection-Guide/140219/...
But I mention the "they're trying to build like the equivalent of the early table-based Microsoft Surface (before that meant a tablet), but pseudo-holographic instead" idea just because it's so unbelievable to me that stand-alone goggles can possibly deliver what they're claiming.
If you read through the depths of Magic Leap's site combined with their patent applications, it becomes clear that they are trying to develop a set of goggles which combines some form of projection onto the retina [0] with some form of selective blocking [1] (to give contrast, and prevent the projected images from appearing as hazy mirages over the light otherwise reaching the retina).
Especially the blocking would be impossible to achieve with anything but goggles.
[0]: https://www.google.com/patents/US20140071539 [1]: https://www.google.com/patents/US20130128230
Still unclear. They do seem to imply they want it to be an unconstrained mobile AR device, but that is indeed ambitious enough to warrant skepticism. Walk-around tracking for home/anywhere is still an unsolved problem for Oculus, and overlay AR is at least several times more demanding.
That's actually how (kinda) Stephenson's VR system he describes in Snow Crash works.
This kind of gets away from many of the issues you have with the Oculus Rift where you have such a tiny window of time (20ms or so) to react to how the person is moving his head. You still have to change the image based on the user's position, but not as much on head rotation which is the really hard part. Just each eye's location in space matters.
Multiple users would likely require multiple projectors.
probably because they's explicitly what they've claimed they're working on in their recent funding announcement. The CEO described their product as a "lightweight wearable".
I think they're mostly in patent hell.
It would be interesting if this was progressing because some major patent roadblocks where about to expire.
Wikipedia suggests that he's a sci-fi author, is there a particular reason for his fame, could you recommend some of his works?
The Baroque Cycle for a semi-fictional view of the beginnings of science - the Newton and Hooke era.
Anathem for an interesting take on the philosophy of science disguised as a sci-fi epic.
IMO it is one of his best works. Nanotech/Networks/Crypto for the masses to understand. I read, loved and was caught up in the VR fever of the 90's via Snow Crash, and love his other books, but TDA is the one I'll never get rid of.
* cult sex scenes
* a forced-participation theater that humiliates you using Occulus Rift-technology
* the Kill Bill-esque ending
* ... and, most of all, the idea of continous education using an immersive Minecraft-like book/world that expands in complexity as your education grows.
Too bad we (the hackers) never completed even a crude version of the Primer (the book in the last bullet point) for the young geeks out there.
I like your point; it compliments itself nicely with my previous one. Soon enough, computers may be able to do many things very well -- however, hackers are not catching up to corporations.
What I mean: if I remember correctly, in the DA world TV and big companies have as big as a grip on general populace as they have to day, but hackers are able to create alternatives, like the mentioned Primer for children's education.
In the real world, "hackers" (or those with the technical know-how to be one) love Apple and Google as much as the rest of the populace does, and leave the big things (OS, main APIs, maps, voice assistant, their personal data, ebook stores, videos available to young children) to them with very little opposition.
Damn, I'm going to have to read it again now. Still, it's about time for a refresh...
There was a time when I thought Snow Crash was the best. There was a time when Cryptonomicon was a lot of fun (still is). Nowadays I incline slightly more towards the 'philosophical opus' type of vibe that Anathem gives off.
Anyway, all his books are pretty good representatives of one sub-genre or another. He's a very good author, and he wrote in a lot of different keys through his career so far.
The Baroque Cycle is a massive piece of work spanning 3 volumes, comprised of 8 nominally independent books. If it seems intimidating, just try the first one and see if you're not hooked. I'd love it if there was twice as much material.
Anathem is by far my favorite. Its hooks take longer to set, but for me they set much deeper. There is a lot going on in this book, and it will truly blow your mind if you let it.
The beginning is actually really tough going as a completely new reader today. It's just so ridiculous. I can see where he was coming from, as I grew up in that era, but it's actually pretty bizarre now given the reality is nation states, religion and banks turned out to be so much more powerful than corporations.
Which is one of the perils of predictions in ageing sci-fi.
I've been on a sci-fi kick recently of all the classics I never read (William Gibson, Ender's Game, The Mars Trilogy, Forever War, Starship Troopers, A Canticle For Leibowitz, Philip K. Dick, Hyperion Cantos, Ringworld) and re-reading some I've not read for a long time (Foundation Series).
I personally found that Snow Crash is by far the most dated book. Even Ringworld and the foundation series were better.
Some of the space opera, on the other hand, was so earnest and certain that we'd be flying around at light-speed by now you feel almost disappointed for the authors.
All cyberpunk is like that, for reasons that are pretty obvious.
> Even Ringworld and the foundation series were better.
Of course. Physical reality changes much more slowly.
And when I refer to Foundation & Ringworld I meant that they are from the 60s and so have some weird cultural ideals as well as some (unintentional) misogyny & racism in the foundation series.
I've a major in Physics and it took me a couple readings to figure out all (well, most of) the connections therein. My favorite game to play while reading Anathem was figuring out where are the borders between historical fact (translated into the fictional world of Arbre, of course), current hypotheses within present-day science, and just downright fiction. Quick quiz: is "geometrodynamics" Stephenson's invention, or a term used in the real world? You get puzzles like that at every step, some easier, some harder.
A few examples that stand out:
Actual history of science - well, Thelenes, Adrakhones, Saunt Tredegarh, Saunt Muncoster, etc. (again, real people disguised under the mask of Arbran characters)
Current hypotheses - the whole Multiverse thing, the Fraa Paphlagon / Hugh Everett parallel.
Out-and-out fiction - eh... this is harder. The Wick, maybe?
And then there's Fraa Jad, all alone in a category of his own. :) I daresay one of the most striking, memorable characters in all sci-fi - if you get the point of the whole book.
[1] http://anathem.wikia.com/wiki/Earth%E2%80%93Arbre_Correlatio...
The Mongoliad semi-fictional view of mid-thirteenth century Mongol invasion of Europe
Reamde MMO gold farming, social networking, criminal methods of the Russian mafia, Islamic terrorists
Reamde starts off with a lot of interesting ideas, and then morphs into quite possibly the worst watered-down, airport-paperback, fourth-rate-Tom-Clancy-triller nonsense I have ever read. Avoid it at all costs. Unbelievable plot and character motives. ick.
If you can suspend disbelief at the sheer ridiculousness of the situation, it's pretty awesome.
Writing aside I've found the plot pretty slow with not much interesting happening for most of the Zula portions (ie. middle half of the book). Maybe Stephenson's level of detail just isn't for me but it really wants for editing.
Anathem and Diamond Age were harder for me because of the depth of ideas. I had to slow down and think to get through them.
Baroque Cycle was harder because of the sheer number of characters with multiple and/or similar names, which is realistic but annoying. There's a list of characters in the back of the first book, which helps, but it's annoying to have to keep the first book handy when you're reading the others.
Stephenson does have a reputation for starting great books and not knowing how to finish them. But I think I've gotten more than my money's worth out of all of them.
http://www.cryptonomicon.com/beginning.html
Warning: written fifteen years ago, also really long.
I'd recommend his "Mother Earth Mother Board" article (more like a small book, be warned) as the definitive tome on the physical reality of how the Internet is held together across the world: http://archive.wired.com/wired/archive/4.12/ffglass.html
Google Earth was heavily influenced by ideas in his books.
The Kindle was codenamed "Fiona", after Fiona Hackworth, a character in one of his books who uses a super-duper e-book.
Gizmodo would beg to differ: http://gizmodo.com/how-magic-leap-is-secretly-creating-a-new...
I was recently pulled into the wormhole of present day speculations (science??) on this. And wow, sounds like what they are working on may yield real, new understanding on cognition and consciousness.
One of the entertaining reads: "Space, self, and the theater of consciousness" by Trehub http://people.umass.edu/trehub/YCCOG828%20copy.pdf
--- Here’s where you’re probably expecting the sales pitch about how mind-blowingly awesome the demo was. But it’s a little more interesting than that. Yes, I saw something on that optical table I had never seen before--something that only Magic Leap, as far as I know, is capable of doing. And it was pretty cool. But what fascinated me wasn’t what Magic Leap had done but rather what it was about to start doing.
Magic Leap is mustering an arsenal of techniques--some tried and true, others unbelievably advanced--to produce a synthesized light field that falls upon the retina in the same way as light reflected from real objects in your environment. Depth perception, in this system, isn’t just a trick played on the brain by showing it two slightly different images.
Most of the work to be done is in applied physics, with a sizable dollop of biology--for there’s no way to make this happen without an intimate understanding of how the eye sees, and the brain assembles a three-dimensional model of reality. I’m fascinated by the science, but not qualified to work on it. Where I hope I can be of use is in thinking about what to do with this tech once it is available to the general public. "Chief Futurist" runs the risk of being a disembodied brain on a stick. I took the job on the understanding that I would have the opportunity to get a few things done. ---