This thread is permanently archived
Did you hear about Intel's HUD-in-your-eyes glasses?
| On the one hand, HUDs are cool as h*ck and putting one into some /cyb/ glasses is exciting
On the other hand Intel seems mostly interested in eating up all my data running their stupid app to guide my shopping habits by giving directions to certain items in retail shops
| >project light directly into an eye
sounds like a bad idea rly
| Google glasses use the same technology, isn't it ?
| >>146129 Class 1 laser devices are safe to look directly into and these are outputting the bare minimum of laser light
| Not interested in these. All things considered and only the technological aspect, I see them with a lot more negatives than positives. We see such things idealistically. It actually is never that way and most probably will be a nuisance than something useful. Imagining terminator eyes is not what I loose sleep about.
| And not only the technological*
This hated touch oriented tech eats words! And I dont want more of this kind of intrusive unprecise shit in my life.
| I heared about Meltdown and Spectre too. And how Intel is the reason we are still stuck with x86 as the most popular architecture in computing.
| Neurointerfaces when?!
| Buy AMD!!!
| Can't wait to have a HUD like those from the fallout games.
Imagine having a bar to print yourself that has a little line that points to where your going (that of course you have to input in a app on your phone, or just have Google apssynch with your glasses)
| Would like to have a Pipboy
| Hell yea lemme get my bac to the future hoverboard
| I wonder if there will be „smart“ anal plugs once. Then proprietary software will become a pain in the ass literally.
| >>146344 +1
But this glasses is awesome as for me, want it (but im sure they will be expensive as fuck)
| >>147845 well try to put armbands on fucking Nokia 6 and use it, no fucking comfort, weird looking and you'll probably need to glue this shite together
| I like the idea. Those glasses look way more practical than Google's, however they kind of use a more primitive technology, I hope they are cheaper at least...
| I think the essential questions when it comes to new hardware are "What does it run?" and "Can I change that?". If I can throw my own code on here and just have to go whatever intel writes, I probably won't be able to have to much fun with it.
| I already feel that people are looking too much at their phone screens.
| >>150467 It has become a mental disease and psychotic addiction for the young generation.
A couple of weeks ago was in a coffee bar waiting on a friend. A couple comes sits at the next table, imediately each busy with own phone. My friend came, we spoke and chatted and all and left. That couple in the meantime all they did was each using their phone. Did not talk, did not pay attention at each other. I even told my friend about them. It was weird.
| >>150487 maybe they werent a couple.
Then again I love everything about VR except for the fact that I wouldn't be able to check my phone from time to time.
| I dunno, I can’t look at any mobile tech without thinking “excellent, one more way for me to be tracked”
Would rather have upgraded home technology
| Anything with the word 'smart' in its name is a gateway to disaster.
| >>151070 Everyone knows how the human body is shaped in every detail. Yet why do you wear some clothes to hide your bush and tits g/u/rl?
| >>150487
They said the same thing about newspapers 100 years ago.
All these self-absorbed ne'redowells reading the sports instead of talking to their neighbors on the train, just imagine the nerve!
| >>151077 d-dont talk about my bush!
And clothing doesn't compare to technology.
With technology you can do things beyond what humans are capable of doing, it doesn't feel right to reject it all just because people who don't really care about you (above a marketing level) can track you.
| >>151275 I do not read newspapers either. It is a known fact that the more newspapers one reads, the more they are political shills and the 'loads of words, little substance' demagogue types.
| >>151960
Noone spoke about rejection. What is being discussed is overextending it everywhere and that the 'why bother' mentality is shallow at best.
| I think people tend to have the 'why bother' mentality when they imagine that the people that surveil you are just looking for terrorists and child pornographers while being indifferent to everyone else. In reality, there's so little oversight that it usually ends up being some guy stalking his exgirlfriend, and, for all we know, it could be some creep looking at children through their webcam.
This thread is permanently archived
| Using a low power lazer, they project light directly into an eye, apparently not visible unless you look down a little bit, so its not always bugging you.
Seems cool, would love to mess with it and develop something. I hope that sort of tech gets more popular and inexpensive - Intel needs to market it and push the frames to sell at eyeglass stores or on amazon for it to get widespread.