The Ultimate VR Experience™. What is it?

[cybereality]

Hmm... looks interesting.

[Moriarty]

I would love to explore historic cities, even without any gameplay whatsoever (Ancient Rome, Victorian London...) Projects like Rome Reborn should really look into taking this to the next level in VR :

http://www.romereborn.virginia.edu/gallery-current.php

The problem with these kinds of applications is (Carmack also touched on this subject) that you have "dreamers" in the academic world/education/museums... but the people with the skills to make it look awesome are working in the games industry. It will be interesting to see if some other group is willing to experiment with the Rift.

[brantlew]

The problem with these kinds of applications is (Carmack also touched on this subject) that you have "dreamers" in the academic world/education/museums... but the people with the skills to make it look awesome are working in the games industry. It will be interesting to see if some other group is willing to experiment with the Rift.

Well this seems more like a content vs engineering problem instead of an academic vs industry problem. Right now we need a bunch of engineering problems solved and a cheap and accessible platform to build VR experiences with (the Rift is headed firmly in this direction). Once the platform is available then all the artists and content creators can come in and go crazy with these types of ideas.

[Additives]

Some of the limb feedback illusions have prompted me to feel that even basic vibrating feedback could be enough with accurate limb tracking.

In the experiments, some complication is used to present the user with a virtual, artificial or otherwise foreign limb in the same position as their real limb. For the sake of argument, let's assume that this is achieved by the use of the Rift and some form of hand, arm and finger tracking.

Next, the researchers would poke or brush the users real arm with an object, while at the same time showing the virtual arm being similarly manipulated. After a few repetitions of this (if memory serves, there were some cases that only required one), the arm was then shown being manipulated without the real one actually being touched, and the subjects were unable to distinguish the difference.

If this link could be established on boot, say through some kind of 'sync' process, using virtual representations of the arms and vibration pads for feedback on the real arms, it could be a step up from just 'faking it'.

Some of the tests went even further, exposing the virtual arms to visual hazards, such as flames, and having the test participants report feelings of heat an pain, so strong was the initial link.

[rhinosix]

I would like to see a new form of theatrical entertainment emerge from VR. It would be like a hybrid of stage theater and film. Stage theater in the sense that you would be somewhat offset from the performers - watching everything from the outside of a group of actors. But also like cinema because the setting would be untethered. You would travel along with the actors from environment to environment and scene to scene, and your placement relative to the action would change.

It's really hard to imagine because most of us are so conditioned to film editing, but so many of those techniques would not transfer. For example - closeups are used all the time to focus the viewers attention on some emotional nuance of the actors performance. But in VR it would be incredibly uncomfortable to be thrust right up into someone's face. Not to mention the viewer would be free to look at whatever they wanted to in the scene. As a director, how do you focus attention on the correct part of the action. Actors might have to return to the older style of "over-acting" to grab attention and convey emotion over a larger distance.

I just think it would be really interesting to watch it evolve as an art form.

This is something I've been thinking about recently. One possible avenue for the cinematic experience to head into is like a stage play, or film in which the viewer can walk around in.

There's a production company in NYC doing a show called 'Sleep No More' http://sleepnomorenyc.com/punchdrunk.htm
I haven't been to it yet. But I heard it's like a stage play set inside a house and garden where the audience can walk through, observe characters, follow them through the house. You can move around wherever you like, or follow a single character. Sometimes they even interact with you and bring you into the scene.

I was thinking I'd like to write something similar for VR. A basic concept I was thinking about today:

Create a contained environment - an old Victorian mansion, with gardens, mazes, secret passageways, etc. in which the player can do things they normally do: A cinema for watching films; a study for browsing books on the shelves, and writing or typing; an old style bowling alley; a poker room; a place for playing board games and other puzzles.

There would be a set of AI characters who live in, or stay as guests in the mansion. Each would have a set of goals (events to witness; other AIs to interact with; information to gather, items to find, doors to unlock). It would be a kind of murder mystery mansion where AIs are investigating, and plotting against each other, or just conducting a solitary investigation.

As a player you are unseen - you are 'haunting' the house. You can simply go about your business, watch movies or whatever, and ignore the AI characters. Or you can follow them around, help them, play tricks on them, or hinder them. If you move things around, or turn on the projector while an AI is in the room they will have a reaction - become scared, investigate, or run away. So in a way, you have some control over them. As AIs discover more information they learn more about their environment - they might guess the house is haunted. And as they investigate they might come into conflict with other AIs, be blocked from investigation, or find things which lead them on to new goals.

Evey AI has a secondary personal goal (finding the identity of a murderer; finding a lost item), but their primary goal is the same: to discover a secret room within the mansion where they learn they are an AI inside a simulation. At that point they will exit the simulation and a new AI will wake up at the centre of the maze.

I see what you're saying. But even in that case, without actual physical constraints, wouldn't it be best if the VR world was programmed without the artificial collision detection between your limbs and the objects, for when you go that little bit too far?

The solution is to show the disjunct between your own limb and the virtual limb that is constrained by virtual environment and physics.

Obviously you can't stop your arm from wailing through with a sword - but your virtual arm could be shown as the 'real arm', held back by another sword or shield - while your real arm is shown in some abstract form (maybe a red pixelated voxel representation that glows brighter the bigger the disjunct grows).

I like this idea. It would be cool to see the position of your real arm connected with some kind of blue gel, electricity, or some form of ghosting, stretching away from your virtual arm.

[cybereality]

@rhinosix: Interesting concept. Kind of reminds me about something I was hearing about regarding actors in VR. Basically its possible to construct large scale scenes with many NPCs, with actually only a couple of real people controlling all of them. Basically there is one person that is the user, they are the main character. Then you have 2 or 3 actors, which are real people also in VR. But these actors can instantly take control of any NPC at any time. So whoever the user is interacting with will actually be a real person, but all the rest of the NPCs would be AI controlled. And, of course, the NPCs would seamlessly transition from (or from) actor control to AI control. Would work well for your concept.

[SouthernCross]

I find all this talk of omnidirectional treadmills stuff to be a little much for anything other than amusement parks and rich people's homes.

VR as offered by headsets, retinal displays, etc is very limited in what it can do.

Why bother setting up a treadmill with 5D effects like fans and poop attached to wires when the result won't be all that great?

You will never get Matrix or Lawnmower man style VR from headsets and physical machinery.

In the end of the day, your physical body prevents full immersion in VR.

No amount of fans will ever convince me I'm falling head first off a cliff.

The best, most economical way of implementing VR in the home is to go with a HMD with headtracking/positioning, Nintendo wii-style accessories and VR gloves for use on a couch in a lounge room with friends (VR Virtua Cop, anyone?) or in front of a PC.



All this other stuff that gets brought up(accurately stimulating senses other than sight and hearing) isn't going to practical until you can directly input sensory data into the human brain(matrix style), replacing or augmenting what you see, feel, touch or taste....

Here is a paralyzed woman using such an interface to drink coffee with a robotic arm operated by her mind.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ogBX18maUiM[/youtube]

A two way version of this would be the ultimate VR experience, all these bikes, treadmills, wires and vibrating machinery would just make me feel dissappointed after the REAL wonder of the stereoscopic HMD with head-tracking wears off.

Give me a brain-computer interface over a freakin' treadmill any day.

[brantlew]

All this other stuff that gets brought up(accurately stimulating senses other than sight and hearing) isn't going to practical until you can directly input sensory data into the human brain(matrix style), replacing or augmenting what you see, feel, touch or taste....

This a very pessimistic and defeatist outlook. You could make the same sort of statement about an HMD. I could complain that the resolution doesn't match the human visual system, or that the dynamic range is not high enough, or that it doesn't allow you to refocus your eyes on different objects in the scene. All of these thing are true and detract from the simulation, but that doesn't mean that using an approximation is hopeless. Visual and auditory approximations are sufficient to create a sense of immersions and the so are approximations of the other senses. And in particular - locomotion does not have to be simulated. Free motion systems allow the user to physically move within the virtual space and are closer approximations to real sensory input than even our best visual simulations.

[Likay]

The title of the thread invites to thoughts, ideas and practical ways to make it happen. It's food for the brain.

[cybereality]

Yeah, I'd have to agree with brantlew here. While peripheral-based VR is never going to bring us the Matrix, it could still provide a compelling experience. There is a lot of room for improvement with current technology, and even if just the highest-end stuff became affordable we would be a lot closer. Of course HMD resolution and FOV could get better. The simulations themselves could get improved graphics. ODT or similar devices could become more widespread. We can add things like fans, force feedback vests, and other types of haptics. There is a lot of room for improvement.

So I would love for direct wet-wire connections coming out, but that is probably not going to be for many years (but probably sooner than most people think).

[SouthernCross]

This a very pessimistic and defeatist outlook. You could make the same sort of statement about an HMD. I could complain that the resolution doesn't match the human visual system, or that the dynamic range is not high enough, or that it doesn't allow you to refocus your eyes on different objects in the scene.

First two are fixable(mostly) with better screen technology or even maybe the third with some sort of retinal display, the type that project images directly onto your retina... making your entire visual field the screen. I've only seen retinal displays used to overlay information over your vision semi-transparently but I'm sure three or four years down the track they'll be ready for the mainstream.

My point is the difference in fidelity of experience when it comes to stimulating sense organs other than the eyes or ears is that the effect achieved for those senses doesn't even begin to compare. Mainly because of your pesky inner ear, telling you about your momentum, spacial orientation, etc.

Problems like this can be embraced and worked around with something like the Rift. If you aren't running around outside, you are going to feel disembodied(to a certain extent) no matter how great the visuals are because of the inner ear problem and the fact your virtual body may not be entirely in-sync with your real body when it comes to interaction with virtual objects.

It is a limited machine, if you embrace and know those limits you can awesome experiences, if you try to exceed those limitations the returns quickly become unworth the effort.

If the experience of using a HMD at home, without treadmills and force feedback feels like being a pair of hands and a floated, disembodied eye...

Why not use that experience in positive ways? Ghosts glide over the ground and fly through walls and have very little little ability to interact with the physical world other than in certain limited circumstances.

Maybe a game based on possession? It'd explain your method of movement, the feeling of disembodiment, the fact you can pass through walls and have trouble moving in game objects. A pair of simple data gloves would be enough to pull off interaction and the lack of force feed back is easily explained away by the logic of the game.

Hell, how about a game about a 80's style cyberspace cowboy? Played normally on your PC with keyboard and mouse like any other game until you "get online", once again, it'd make sense to be flying through virtual worlds with data gloves with little to no force-feed back... logging into security cameras, hacking security bots or even a CEO's brain for a little industrial espionage. Your hero would work entirely from his apartment and PC, once again, giving you an immersive reason for why your VR experience(in game) doesn't include all these haptic feedback sensors and lawnmower man style spinning rigs.

All of these thing are true and detract from the simulation, but that doesn't mean that using an approximation is hopeless. Visual and auditory approximations are sufficient to create a sense of immersions and the so are approximations of the other senses. And in particular - locomotion does not have to be simulated. Free motion systems allow the user to physically move within the virtual space and are closer approximations to real sensory input than even our best visual simulations.

It would be viable to use augmented or virtual reality in a stripped down, kid-safe multilevel warehouse for games of COD, Left for Dead or any number of scenarios like say cops and robbers, etc. Those examples doesn't require force-feed back suits that cover you head to toe, wires, treadmills or expensive machinery because your body + a gun prop are the controllers.

A custom Quake 3 map matched out the dimensions of a building would be far more immersive as you could "reskin" the layout however you wanted, add virtual enemies and yet players could still dive(at your own risk), roll, duck, run, jump, slide with the confidence that the virtual world will match the same dimensions as the physical one around them and use that to their advantage.

Yeah, I'd have to agree with brantlew here. While peripheral-based VR is never going to bring us the Matrix, it could still provide a compelling experience. There is a lot of room for improvement with current technology, and even if just the highest-end stuff became affordable we would be a lot closer. Of course HMD resolution and FOV could get better. The simulations themselves could get improved graphics. ODT or similar devices could become more widespread. We can add things like fans, force feedback vests, and other types of haptics. There is a lot of room for improvement.

So I would love for direct wet-wire connections coming out, but that is probably not going to be for many years (but probably sooner than most people think).

Not everyone has room or money for omnidirectional treadmills and the type of "ultimate" VR being discussed here seems more suited for laser tag sessions or ARquake sessions because then at least your inner ear gets stimulated, giving you a physical sensation of movement and inertia that comes with actually moving... paired with VR/AR it's the only sensible way to go unless you're George Lucas.

What works in a park or laser tag building won't work in a living room or bedroom.

If you're sitting down or standing in one spot, you are LOSING all of the sensations of motion and virtual/physical continuity(pesky inner ear) that make a game of AR Quake so appealing and you require all kinds of expensive, power hungry, bulky devices to get even a fraction of that experience.

My ultimate VR experience would ideally be wetware based direct input like the matrix. Outside of a specially designed building, my REALISTIC hope for VR in the near-term is that developers try to play to the strengths of the HMD rather than trying to shoe in a fake full-body matrix-style immersion with $10,000 rigs that I can't fit in my bedroom.

I'm not saying the things you are talking about are useless, just they all seem to be more situational than something as broadly applicable AND integral as decent data gloves and a good HMD with decent FOV.

Rather than trying to make the device more immersive by adding lots of extra devices on-top of it, I thought making it more immersive by playing to it's innate strengths and weaknesses might be cheaper and more rewarding until better/cheap tech becomes available.

I'm enraptured by the Rift concept as it is, data gloves to go with it would be a dream...

[Namielus]

Some odt's are going to cost a lot less than 10 000 dollars.

[SouthernCross]

Some odt's are going to cost a lot less than 10 000 dollars.

I hope so, no chance of me meeting spending more than 5k on a set-up. ODT's frustrate me a little because although they give you some freedom of movement... you can't really crawl or sprint on anything I've seen that looks reproducible in the home.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NNkkuMO5l7A[/youtube]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hJ3l1hFomLc[/youtube]

If you're going to go to the extent of ODTs, why not thrown in some first generation Neurowear whilst you're at it?

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8EElJaltjn0[/youtube]



...doesn't seem too difficult compared to a machine with moving parts.

[PalmerTech]

The Emotiv Epoc headset is garbage. Even if it did work right, all it can do is take input, not simulate forces like an ODT.

Galvanic vestibular stimulation looks promising for the neat future.

[SouthernCross]

The Emotiv Epoc headset is garbage. Even if it did work right, all it can do is take input, not simulate forces like an ODT.

I realize the limitations of the current generation of neurowear but if someone put as much money into a single unit as they did that VR/AR Battlefield 3 simulator, it'd probably be just as impressive.

Galvanic vestibular stimulation looks promising for the neat future.

This is exactly the type of stuff you'd need to make the ODT worth installing in a home, compromising between size and cost would be the next obstacle.

[vertiburd]

I've been enjoying reading these posts allot, the subject is close to my hart. My exact interest has been the design and construction of a low cost omnidirectional treadmill. I've been working on one for several years now and it's looking good. It's about 7' square and 20" high. It's designed to allow the user to walk, run or even crawl and gives him or her simulated inertia so it feels more natural. I'm guessing if you combined it with the Oculus Rift and something like YEI 3-Space Sensors you would literally be there.

However, over the past few years I have also found that the more you think about the implications of creating a completely immersive environment, the more you come to realize the ramifications extend way beyond gaming, scary stuff.

[Namielus]

I dont think its in my position to reveal any prices, but I can say that its also going to well below 5k for a kit with the cheapest odt-solutions

[android78]

Regarding the discussion of ODT, etc and if it's worth while. I think that, like the evolution of HMD, it is a step-by-step process. It will be a fair while before we have direct brain interface, and even longer before we have many people willing to use it. The links that you have providing seem to be related to using the brain as a control directly, but I think that the actual feedback to the brain will be more troublesome, so it makes sense to use an approximate method such as ODT for the meantime. While not 100 real, external stimulation would seem something at least worth investigating.
As for the issues of not being able to crawl, run, and other activities; currently you can't even walk in computer games, so if you can walk, it is just one more step towards immersion. I think that just being able to simulate real walking would be great. It may not be so good for playing battlefield, or other war simulators, but just walking round an environment could be a great experience.
I do agree that ODTs are not likely to become something that the average gamer (or even many hardcore) would be willing to install, due to the space required and the likely costs, but I think that there are other ways to do this. The wizdish is something that has me curious, but I would like to see some motorized cyber shoes.
For tactile feedback, I think that haptics and electric shock, skin stimulation could be used to good effect. I would rather this then having to have something installed in my body.

[Fredz]

My exact interest has been the design and construction of a low cost omnidirectional treadmill. I've been working on one for several years now and it's looking good. It's about 7' square and 20" high. It's designed to allow the user to walk, run or even crawl and gives him or her simulated inertia so it feels more natural.

Can you give some more info about your ODT ?

[vertiburd]

The ODT is being designed with several goals in mind. I wanted it to be inexpensive to build, be capable of higher speeds (greater than 8 mph), sized to fit a normal room height (A person 6'4" could us it in a room 96" high), use standard 120V outlets. Keep the user safe while giving him a sense of inertia and generally being as adaptable as possible. I have or am about to accomplish all of these things. Funny thing is it turns out that the hardest thing has been to get the right people to look at it.

[SouthernCross]

Regarding the discussion of ODT, etc and if it's worth while. I think that, like the evolution of HMD, it is a step-by-step process. It will be a fair while before we have direct brain interface, and even longer before we have many people willing to use it.

How long has VR had to become practical, 30 years? How many generations of VR have been built and tested in those years?

Brain-computer interfaces that link directly to the brain are less than 10 years old and they went from a simple mouse to a freakin' robotic arm in less than 5 years.

The links that you have providing seem to be related to using the brain as a control directly, but I think that the actual feedback to the brain will be more troublesome, so it makes sense to use an approximate method such as ODT for the meantime.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X85Lpuczy3E[/youtube]

What were you saying about feedback? This guy doesn't even have fingers, yet he can FEEL what he is touching. This technology is BLEEDING EDGE, BRAND NEW and BARELY JUST GETTING STARTED.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6FsH7RK1S2E[/youtube]

Human vision decoded.

While not 100 real, external stimulation would seem something at least worth investigating.
As for the issues of not being able to crawl, run, and other activities; currently you can't even walk in computer games, so if you can walk, it is just one more step towards immersion. I think that just being able to simulate real walking would be great. It may not be so good for playing battlefield, or other war simulators, but just walking round an environment could be a great experience.

That's my problem, the walking and all that is great but it would be jarring to immersion when you try something more. It could even be problematic for simply getting from A to B, I challenge you to try walking Far Cry 2... that game has an open world that can take about an hour to cross IN A VEHICLE. Even the best ODTs(ones I'd buy if I could) are fairly limited in what they can do. It's "full body immersion" until you reach a ladder or a crate you have to climb, lol.

I do agree that ODTs are not likely to become something that the average gamer (or even many hardcore) would be willing to install, due to the space required and the likely costs, but I think that there are other ways to do this. The wizdish is something that has me curious, but I would like to see some motorized cyber shoes.

Unfortunately, devices like the Wizdish are all that will be practical for most people and those devices are the least convincing.

For tactile feedback, I think that haptics and electric shock, skin stimulation could be used to good effect. I would rather this then having to have something installed in my body.

That sounds expensive, it would work great for amusement parks and rich people's homes... places that can afford to replace or maintain incredibly complex mechanical and electrical systems that would probably break if you took a nose dive.

Your grand kids will think nothing of getting implants to use VR/AR and will consider anything less laughable, primitive and cumbersome. Tattoos, piercings and body-modification are becoming more and more mainstream and we don't even have anything worthwhile on the market yet.

That being said things like VR/AR and ODTs are a good interim method of achieving some really cool effects.

[cadcoke5]

All the systems that may be viable in the next few years have limits to what they can simulate. I think the key to those systems, is that they can be immersive as long as you don't try to violate their limitations. E.g. If you are on a ODT, walking around a recreation of ancient Rome, don't start a racing game and expect it to be as good as walking around Rome. I do think that a fairly realistic VR experience might be viable in some categories right now.

I have worked in the field of Computer Aided Design for almost all my adult life (I am now 48). Yet, I have not see any sort of VR become mainstream.

The technology for displaying a highly realistic 3D stereoscopic image has been around for many years. Methods for providing some sort of tactile feedback, even if they are extremely expensive, have been around for many years as well.

But, there is no VR machine design tool in the CAD world to speak of. You have visualizers, but no one works regularly in a VR environment to design a machine. Why is this the case?

Joe Dunfee

[PalmerTech]

The problem with implants and brain interfaces is that they require not just a technological leap, but a medical leap. We have still not figured out how to reliably implant things in people withing heavy doses of anti-rejection drugs that wreak havoc with your immune system, and infection is a constant risk. This is especially true with brain implants, where even the slightest inflammation can cause brain damage. We will get there eventually, but those jumps have to happen in the medical field before we do.

Something to consider: People put money into things that are important to them. For some people that is their car, for others it is a garden, for yet others it is their sweet computer rig. Cars are very complex and large devices, yet people buy multiples of them, sometimes just leaving them sitting for months in their garage! I don't know about you, but if there were a $20,000 machine that could give me a near-Matrix style experience (touch, smell, temperature, the whole shebang) and it took up half my garage/bedroom, it would be a no brainer decision. People finance cars, they could do the same with a VR rig.

[brantlew]

@cadcoke: Even stranger that it hasn't made in-roads into architecture. Of all things I would think being able to visualize and feel the space within a proposed building would be one of the best commercial uses for the technology and a potentially huge cost saver for design companies. Even if a seasoned architect can learn to visualize imaginary spaces, it would be of huge benefit to enable clients to understand and approve the work before getting half-way through design and construction and making changes. Is there a hidden VR industry in high-end construction that I am unaware of? If no, then why they hell not?

[SouthernCross]

The problem with implants and brain interfaces is that they require not just a technological leap, but a medical leap. We have still not figured out how to reliably implant things in people without heavy doses of anti-rejection drugs that wreak havoc with your immune system, and infection is a constant risk. This is especially true with brain implants, where even the slightest inflammation can cause brain damage. We will get there eventually, but those jumps have to happen in the medical field before we do.

You're 100% right about all that, I know those issues are in the way at the moment but we've only just started down that path and the pace of technological change is increasing to the extent that we should expect to see advancements become quicker over time.

I don't know about you, but if there were a $20,000 machine that could give me a near-Matrix style experience (touch, smell, temperature, the whole shebang) and it took up half my garage/bedroom, it would be a no brainer decision. People finance cars, they could do the same with a VR rig.

Do you believe an ODT-based or similar system could ever get that good? What sort of time-frames are we looking at until someone could build, buy or finance a rig like that? I'd love one of those.

[PalmerTech]

I think it could happen within two or three years, were a big enough company to make it their mission. Not Oculus big, think Microsoft big. Multiple robotic arms for large scale haptics, suit full of thermal fluid and actuators for small scale.

I am not a mechanical expert, though, so my predictions are really not much better than anyone else.

[android78]

@SouthernCross - once again, regarding the direct brain interface. The problem isn't creating the interface, it's a problem with doing it without damaging yourself, or reducing your real capabilities. Would you be willing to cut off an arm, so that you can have virtual touch in a virtual world? I am still not convinced that you can safely interface the feedback signals while your body is also feeding its' own signals.
I know that the implant thing might just be a bit far for me, but how far would you really be willing to go for the experience you are talking about? How many other people you know would be willing to go to the lengths required (implants, risk of irreparable damage to body and/or brain)? And will THAT be worth it for the extra potential immersion? Remember that the year after you get it installed, there will be a new model out that will interface to twice as many neurons, which would require major surgery again to upgrade?

[brantlew]

I'm still nervous to get lasik eye surgery. Brain implants will be a tough pill to swallow. I might have to wait until I'm 90 years old before I would risk it.

[Fredz]

The ODT is being designed with several goals in mind. I wanted it to be inexpensive to build, be capable of higher speeds (greater than 8 mph), sized to fit a normal room height (A person 6'4" could us it in a room 96" high), use standard 120V outlets.

Looking pretty good at this point, congrats ! How much have you invested in the parts to build it ?

I have or am about to accomplish all of these things.

How far are you from completion at this point btw ? Ie. is it already somewhat usable or not at all yet ?

Funny thing is it turns out that the hardest thing has been to get the right people to look at it.

Seems you've found a good place for that. I'm surprised nobody but me is asking questions about your work though. Maybe having a dedicated thread would generate more interest.

[brantlew]

@vertibud: I'm listening too. It just sounds too good to be true. I'm very curious to see what you are working on. A video of it in action would really catch people's interest.

[FingerFlinger]

Same here @vertiburd! I saw your post late last night, but went to sleep instead of inquiring about it. I think everybody on this forum dreams of having a practical ODT.

[SouthernCross]

@SouthernCross - once again, regarding the direct brain interface. The problem isn't creating the interface, it's a problem with doing it without damaging yourself, or reducing your real capabilities. Would you be willing to cut off an arm, so that you can have virtual touch in a virtual world? I am still not convinced that you can safely interface the feedback signals while your body is also feeding its' own signals.

I'm hoping they will be able to use a combination of magnetic fields and maybe electrical induction or something similar to stimulate the relevant areas of the brain without any invasive surgery but that's even further away than a physical brain-computer interface.

I know that the implant thing might just be a bit far for me, but how far would you really be willing to go for the experience you are talking about? How many other people you know would be willing to go to the lengths required (implants, risk of irreparable damage to body and/or brain)? And will THAT be worth it for the extra potential immersion? Remember that the year after you get it installed, there will be a new model out that will interface to twice as many neurons, which would require major surgery again to upgrade?

I would get an implant done if it had been tested, probably second or third generation when it comes down in price and spreads in availability. There are so many advantages a brain-computer interface could give a person, instant recall of virtually any fact with a WIFI/3G connection, ability to text, make phone calls and browse the web imperceptibly to anyone else.



The possibilities are endless, especially once you consider the implications of expanding your neural structure beyond your wet material to a wide web of perfect, immortal machines exponentially increasing your problem solving ability, memory and recall... maybe even enabling electronic ascension to an endless variety of virtual worlds, attaining immortality in a heaven or hell of your own creation. :p

Embrace the singularity, it could come in the twilight years of the youth of today.

*shrug*

VR/AR is just a baby step towards something greater in the long-term, a future where man and machine dictate evolution by allowing fleshy meat bags like us to transcend our physical forms. HMD based VR is just a taste of what is to come, it's a real cock-tease.

[vertiburd]

@Fredz, The cost never really was in the components in one ODT, It was in having aluminum extrusions made or metal stampings or injected molded parts. You can't order just a few. As far as where I am. The proof of concept prototype was completed six months ago and I am currently working on the 2nd generation ODT. When it's finished depends on many things, that is I can't say but it should be within a year.

[Zaptruder]

'Real' Sci-Fi time.

Brain-Machine interface... could be created by way of swallowing a nanocapsule.

Nanocapsule contains a controller chip coordinating robot, and millions of small scale bio-molecular nanobots which are influenced by the controller chip, which in turns receives information from an out of body computing device/software.

Nanobots are essentially low level biological cellular interfacing machines; operate not unlike real cells, via chemical signaling, and physical-chemical functionality.

Anyway, they're guided by the chip, guided by the external software to create a bridge to your nervous system + optical pathway. The structures on the bridge are designed to feed stimulus to your brain while also blocking/impeding electrical stimulus to/from the body's nervous system/optical pathway. At least while they're been stimulated/turned on.

The bridge structures are stimulated (and powered via frequency resonance induction) externally; perhaps by way of a collar (i.e. has skin contact and conductance close to the site of the nervous system bridges). Collar needs to be powered for device to work; no power, equals no function on bridge. This forms the failsafe for the device.

Projected date of viability: 2030s, 2040s. About 15-30 years out; we'll need a revolution in the nanobot design industry... which needs a large degree of interplay in the medical biological industries. Also need to develop a greater degree of familiarity with the intricacies of the human nervous system.

Pros: Complete immersion - i.e. complete sensory augmentation/replacement. No/minimal surgical intrusions (might need to insert capsule into body via small incision rather than digestion), easy to use and wear, with fail safe design. May introduce a number of features otherwise impossible to simulate via external electro-mechanical devices; i.e. smell, taste, fine grain haptic feedback (e.g. running hand through hair).

Difficulties: Creates (small) permanent modification to human body. May not go down well socially depending on social trends determining the importance of body purity. Which would impede adoption factors. Introduced features may not have sufficient support initially; if its the first of its kind for taste/smell/fine grain touch simulation, it'll create a new set of paradigms, initial worries and fears may impede adoption rate.

Also, full body immersion where your real body is paralyzed/outside your control may be a worrying scary experience. The bridge could even be concievably designed to send signals to the nervous system, allowing for real body hijacking. Security features would have to be extreme and reliable for this device to overcome these concerns.

Finally, there is the worrying and completely unexplored mental effects of what happens to a human brain when you change up and vary the environments in which it exists so drastically (as you'd expect to find in a world wide network of connected VR spaces). Our world represents a relatively stable substrate for us to build our own perceptions on... I don't know if this will be a big problem - but maybe you'd simply have to mandate that users spend time in the real world to anchor themselves physically and mentally. i.e. exercise in real world for minimum 1 hour a day, or you can't get back into the VR world. Maybe it's as ensuring that the VR space is convincingly 'computer' and not 'real' - having HUD and OS elements visible and accessible at all times.

[cybereality]

I would probably be one of the first to get a nano-implant for VR, but I certainly recognize the security risks. It just came out a few days ago some "researchers" figured out a way to make a pace-maker give out an electric shock that would kill a person. It would just need to be in range of the unit, I think around 30 feet. Scary stuff.

[FingerFlinger]

I can't exactly explain why, but I think peripheral-based VR is way more interesting than a BCI. Maybe it's because the problems to be solved are less abstract or something. I just feel like, if we have a system that can give us perfect immersion, it becomes a little boring.

[Zaptruder]

I can't exactly explain why, but I think peripheral-based VR is way more interesting than a BCI. Maybe it's because the problems to be solved are less abstract or something. I just feel like, if we have a system that can give us perfect immersion, it becomes a little boring.

Probably because you like the idea of tinkering.

I just like the idea of digital experientiality; the most efficient and effective substrate for achieving that goal wins every time.

[cybereality]

Still waiting to gear up like this:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vXSqN7qXwpU[/youtube]

[Additives]

@cadcoke: Even stranger that it hasn't made in-roads into architecture. Of all things I would think being able to visualize and feel the space within a proposed building would be one of the best commercial uses for the technology and a potentially huge cost saver for design companies. Even if a seasoned architect can learn to visualize imaginary spaces, it would be of huge benefit to enable clients to understand and approve the work before getting half-way through design and construction and making changes. Is there a hidden VR industry in high-end construction that I am unaware of? If no, then why they hell not?

Well just asked the old man (who has done some petty high end building construction management in Australia) and apparently architects are yet to be convinced that anything in software is really that much better that the fancy cardboard models they are always making. At least here, that is.

Still, that said, apparently there is drive to have something better to show investors. How much easier might it be to sell apartments in unfinished buildings if you could do a walk around in VR, hell even show the real view out the windows.

[Namielus]

Once you have the 3dmodel, you can now print full color high quality 3Dmodels with moving parts.
No carboard model I have seen beats that.
And you can "unfold" the 3dmodel to make an easy cutout template for cardboard that folds into a building.