It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

"Augmented Reality": The future interface? (video)

page: 1
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 7 2010 @ 09:30 PM
link   
Interesting video and concept for new ways of processing information. Like most new technologies, this concept presents both opportunities and dangers. A look at the video will give even non-techies like me an idea of the possibilities being gamed out in this area:




More information on this particular concept can be found here:

vimeo.com...

The site above explains:




Augmented Reality (AR) is an emerging technology defined by its ability to overlay physical space with information. It is part of a paradigm shift that succeeds Virtual Reality; instead of disembodied occupation of virtual worlds, the physical and virtual are seen together as a contiguous, layered and dynamic whole. It may lead to a world where media is indistinguishable from 'reality'. The spatial organisation of data has important implications for architecture, as we re-evaluate the city as an immersive human-computer interface.

More at source:
vimeo.com...



[edit on 9/7/10 by silent thunder]




posted on Sep, 7 2010 @ 10:04 PM
link   
is this a virtual world or a 3d interface only seen with eyewear?
second line



posted on Sep, 7 2010 @ 10:11 PM
link   
This would be done how? Placing nano computer chips into brain cells or what?



posted on Sep, 7 2010 @ 10:31 PM
link   
reply to post by HomerinNC
 


I think it is the "real" world with information overlaying it. It is not a totally virtual world...the user sees these things while walking around in the real world and uses real hand movements, etc.

reply to post by Nventual
 


I son't know know whether the technology would be harnassed via an eyeglass-type interface or through some sort of chip implant in the eye or brain. Another possiblity would be a patch or a "tiara-like" band that could be temporarily applied to the forehead for direct neural stimulation, and removed at will.



posted on Sep, 7 2010 @ 10:46 PM
link   
Hi everyone!

I'm thrilled to finally see a topic about augmented reality! I was thinking of writing something on this but I've been too busy writing my master's thesis which just happens to be on a particular application of augmented reality. So I'll try to put my knowledge to good use and explain a bit.

Basically augmented reality is the process of overlaying digital information over the real world. To achieve this, there are many hardware configuration possible. The concept was launched by Ivan sutherland in 1968 when he proposed the first helmet mounted display (HMD). Nowadays, various hardware configuration are possible to allow the user to interact with an augmented reality world.

Augmented reality is not virtual reality, it is a mixed reality as defined by Paul Milgram in the 1990s. It is derived from virtual reality. A common example of augmented reality is the yellow line when you're watching a football game. The way it works is that knowing the position and orientation of the user's head, you can position and orient the 3D graphics that you want to overlay on the real world. In order to obtain the position and orientation of the user's head, there are many possibilities, the most common being the use of a GPS receptor and an inertial sensor which works with the magnetic field of the earth.

To me HMDs are the best display system available for AR because they integrate with the user completely and allow the best immersion possible. However there are now a lot of augmented reality applications available on the iPhone and such devices. Concepts have been proposed for AR contact lenses so we might be seeing that in the future.

Oh and the idea of AR was first put to use by the military in fighter jets... of course.

I could go on and on about AR... In fact I have to go on and on about AR in my thesis... 100 and something pages on the whole technology... woooohooo. So any questions are welcomed!



posted on Sep, 7 2010 @ 10:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Nventual
 


Hahaha, noononoono, no nano chips in the brain... yet!!

Like I said, GPS and inertial sensors, all available on the iPhone or in some HMDs systems. Look up the Vuzix iWear, 600$ piece of technology that's fun to play with. It's basically two screens, on for each eye, with a camera that films the world. The video stream is then analyzed through computer vision algorithms and the 3D graphics are superimposed on the stream.



posted on Sep, 7 2010 @ 10:50 PM
link   
Double post.... my first!!

[edit on 7-9-2010 by Wowbagger]



posted on Sep, 7 2010 @ 10:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by silent thunder


I son't know know whether the technology would be harnassed via an eyeglass-type interface or through some sort of chip implant in the eye or brain. Another possiblity would be a patch or a "tiara-like" band that could be temporarily applied to the forehead for direct neural stimulation, and removed at will.

I did at first think it would be done with an eyeglass interface but in the video no one is wearing one. I figure the way it's shown in the video could only be done with modifying our brains.



posted on Sep, 7 2010 @ 10:56 PM
link   
In the video no one is wearing eyewear because it's impossible to film real augmented reality without being from the user's point of view. The user wearing the eyewear is the guy holding the camera. I've done the same thing for my research and publications.


It's not impossible, but it's way less impressive.

[edit on 7-9-2010 by Wowbagger]



posted on Sep, 7 2010 @ 10:57 PM
link   
This is very interesting technology but im not sure the people could handle it. I mean im sure they could use it but if we cant be responsible with cell phones now. How is this gonna work?



posted on Sep, 7 2010 @ 11:00 PM
link   
The biggest ethical issue I see with Augmented reality is the possibility that advertisement could be forced upon the user.

Also, it makes you think about what is real what is not. Once we master the vision aspect of the human being, who's to say what's real then?



posted on Sep, 7 2010 @ 11:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Wowbagger
 


Oh right. But still it is possible that we may be able to access these things using our brain only right? What about the ethical side of that, like at what age should you be allowed to have it done and what if you can't remove it? Imagine the huge split up of society into those that have these interfaces and those that don't.



posted on Sep, 7 2010 @ 11:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Nventual
 


Well right now, it's impossible to do augmented reality without hardware, and it won't be possible for a long time. I mean to achieve this you would basically have to know how to add directly to human vision by messing with the brain and all. The closest "natural" interface existing right now is eyewear. In the near future maybe contact lenses. In the far future, maybe brain stuff.

As for children, I have to say I had never thought of that and it's not adressed in the litterature becasue it's not an issue right now considering the users still have full control over the technology.

That being said, I don't think there's harm in children using the tech asides maybe from forced advertising. Kids are influencable. But, if it comes to forced AR through brain manipulation, then the ethical issues are multiplied... to say the least.

To add to this, it's not the tech that should be regulated, it's the apps made from the tech.

[edit on 7-9-2010 by Wowbagger]



posted on Sep, 7 2010 @ 11:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Wowbagger
 



Also new generations will grow up with their childhood memory not only being of a time of innocence and fun but also a time where visually things looked different. I just think it's weird to think about.



posted on Sep, 7 2010 @ 11:20 PM
link   
(your supposed to wear those cardboard red and blue 3-d glasses while watching this)

just a tip...



posted on Sep, 7 2010 @ 11:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Nventual
 


Well you've got me thinking. With my rational scientific mind, I hadn't thought of how it could affect our perception of life to that extent.

You think people that grow up on that technology could be confused enough to not be able to differentiate real from virtual? I guess if it comes to the point where the hardware is not necessary for AR, then I guess it could become easy to confuse.

But still, there are so many good uses to make of AR in education, tourism, manufacturing, archeology, urban planning and design... you can't put it on the shelf for maybes...

It's like any technology, it has the potential to be used for good and bad. For example, to me, iPhones are rotting a whole new generation!



posted on Sep, 7 2010 @ 11:27 PM
link   
reply to post by epitaph.one
 



You're right but this is just to give the external watcher a sense of 3D. It's completely useless for the user wearing eyewear that actually evolving through the augmented environment.

Red-Blue glasses is the most basic, useless form of fake 3D.



posted on Sep, 7 2010 @ 11:27 PM
link   
reply to post by epitaph.one
 


Gahh... double post again.

[edit on 7-9-2010 by Wowbagger]



posted on Sep, 7 2010 @ 11:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wowbagger

You think people that grow up on that technology could be confused enough to not be able to differentiate real from virtual? I guess if it comes to the point where the hardware is not necessary for AR, then I guess it could become easy to confuse.


To an extent. Imagine at age 12 you get a permanent AR that doesn't use any hardware, then by the age of 20 you've been using it nonstop - imagine being friends with somebody from the same city who chose not to get the AR? It would be like if Africa and Tokyo were located 3 minutes from each other.

Do you see what I mean? It would change our reality so much (you could probably download "skins" to change how objects look like making the sky pink, etc - sounds impossible but if humanity can survive for billions of more years this sort of stuff would be sooo primitive).



posted on Sep, 8 2010 @ 12:03 PM
link   
If we were all robots instead of humans, then we could behave under a common protocol or law, we'd finally have a standard set of morals and could enjoy this new interface without going apeshift all the time, and giving into our "wicked" carnal lusts, that lead some of us to behave like wolves and thieves. If we had mechanical brains, then perhaps this technology could prove to keep the humans under control through entertainment.

BUT, we are not robots,(thank God), and people will never stop wanting to hurt and kill each other, it's in our nature, so I only see this type of advancement as yet another deterrent from The True meaning of life that our Mother Nature intended for us to experience.

It seems, the further away we get from the jungle, the more beastly we become.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join