Holodeck, v1

[LaughingCheese]

http://www.fastcodesign.com/3036628/mic ... e-holodeck





And honestly, matter/energy conversion is way overkill. All you really need to simulate physicality is some kind of direct neural input, or a cloud of nano machines, or potentially something else; anyway there's probably some other method of simulating physicality thats far more energy efficient and just as real.

If this never gets a consumer version I swear, I'll freaking build my own, and one up them too. 8)

What a time to be alive eh?

[Mikey]

It'll go to market quick enough once someone starts to put out PornAlive.

[McAvoy]

Wasn't that the reason why Blu-ray won was because of ps3 and porn?

[IanKennedy]

Projecting on a wall does not mean you've built a holodeck.

[Mikey]

Projecting on a wall does not mean you've built a holodeck.

Your point is well-taken, but I think the OP reference was to the organic nature of adapting to various POV's simultaneously.

[IanKennedy]

Projecting on a wall does not mean you've built a holodeck.

Your point is well-taken, but I think the OP reference was to the organic nature of adapting to various POV's simultaneously.

Rather than it being holographic in any way. Holo - deck, unless it's on a ship it's neither. The display element is the only part that's new at all. To suggest that this is a holodeck and the xbox via a screen with kinetic isn't just doesn't add up.

[Mikey]

Yes, I get it - it's not a holodeck, because it's not "holo." I still think you're being a bit too literal, and ignoring the overarching use of the reference to indicate the somewhat Trekian nature of the adaptive and predictive display qualities.

[LaughingCheese]

Yes, I get it - it's not a holodeck, because it's not "holo." I still think you're being a bit too literal, and ignoring the overarching use of the reference to indicate the somewhat Trekian nature of the adaptive and predictive display qualities.

I'll say.


Also, you apparently totally missed this, willfully or not:

And honestly, matter/energy conversion is way overkill. All you really need to simulate physicality is some kind of direct neural input, or a cloud of nano machines, or potentially something else; anyway there's probably some other method of simulating physicality thats far more energy efficient and just as real.

Seriously how does this NOT qualify as some kind of a first step??

Just because it doesn't have any kind of physical interface does not in anyway mean that it probably won't be looked back on as some kind of precursor in the probably long list of iterations before we actually reach the real thing.

Do you really expect a research lab to pop out the fully functional holodeck?

I KNOW your not ignorant of how technology develops but, those statements would give one pause, I think.


Its like how people bash CG for being "bad." Yeah, any effects done poorly will be "bad", even your vaunted physical effects vs digital.

I just don't understand why people always bash a developing technology. Its DEVELOPING.

This is how tech develops, slowly, iteratively, and people still don't get it apparently.



EDIT: Perhpas "v1" is a bit too high; maybe like v0.00000023954834 or something.

[IanKennedy]

The point you seem to be blind to is that this is virtually no different from simply Kinect (or any equivilent) except for the display tech. The display tech used in this is hardly new, projectors have been around for at least a decade. I can't see that putting the two together makes this something wonderful and new. Get the point now?

It's not bashing new tech, because there is NO NEW TECH HERE. It's not developing, it's nearly combining old tech in a very slightly different way.

[LaughingCheese]

I see what you mean, I suppose I was pretty blind to it.

Easily distracted by shiny objects I guess.


I still think it should be considered some kind of first step.


I just realized tho; if you added a 3d printer you would have (at very basic level) this:

http://stargate.wikia.com/wiki/Molecula ... ion_device