Submitted by Neurogence t3_z6s6si in singularity
medraxus t1_iy2x3d5 wrote
The hardware isn't there yet
vernes1978 t1_iy3r2j1 wrote
Too cumbersome.
The mobilephone fits in the hand, and we have grown to accept the desktop computer.
It needs be 0% cumbersome.
No wires, no weight, and cheap enough.
Until it become as mainstream as cocacola, the gameing industry will keep treating as a niche.
That's why you only find new game mechanics in indie games.
The big publishers only go for sure wins.
So another Doom, another OverWatch (I think OverWatch is already another something else).
Neurogence OP t1_iy3dcza wrote
I guess my error is my inclination to try to apply Moore's law to every type of technology. It does seem that things progress very slowly for tech that involves physical hardware. Software is easy but progress in tech where there's physical hardware involve can be frustratingly slow.
I guess it's kinda similar to how smartphones have not changed much at all since 2007. At this point it would not even be surprising if people are still using smartphones in the 2030s. Seems it's mostly software where most of the advancement is taking place.
People like Kurzweil imagine we will have Nanobots in our brains by the 2030s to replace smartphones but that involves serious hardware that we have no idea how to create.
Our best hope for a hard takeoff is AGI.
World_May_Wobble t1_iy3w5ts wrote
Consider commercial aviation. It has seen no gains in 40 years. In fact, it slid back with the death of Concorde. Sometimes things stagnate because there's a lack of imagination, or the economics is bad, or there just physically is no way to do the thing we envision.
Stagnation has been the norm for most of human history, and we should expect more of it with things that aren't closely linked to some kind of feed-forward loop. Smaller transistors help us make smaller transistors. Better AI can help us make better AI. Better VR ... Is just better VR.
Edit: Airliners have seen some gains in fuel efficiency, and they've obviously become more computerized but these are not the kind of exponential transformations we have become used to in computing.
Seek_Treasure t1_iy4psqj wrote
That's not true, fuel efficiency (and range) in commercial aviation has improved a lot in past few decades.
World_May_Wobble t1_iy4qkvi wrote
Has it? How many doublings has the range of airliners undergone in the last 40 years?
Seek_Treasure t1_iy4rd90 wrote
World_May_Wobble t1_iy4tufx wrote
Likewise airfare seems to have halved at least once.
It's not transformational, and we'd be disappointed if the biggest improvement in VR between now and 2050 was that it was cheaper -- but it is something.
Seek_Treasure t1_iy4uulu wrote
Airplanes will transition to electric eventually. There's some really hard challenges to this, but the progress is being made. More immersive VR and true usable AR will come. There's some really hard challenges to solve (some, like batteries and heat are shared with aviation), but the progress is there. It's not just hardware, software also helps. For example, fast ML computer vision for eye tracking helps foveated rendering, and we're far from done here.
bemmu t1_iy3npsx wrote
There has to be enough demand to make it good enough, and it has to be good enough for there to be enough demand.
As it gets better in each generation, there will be increased incentive and competition to make the hardware even better, in a nice virtuous cycle. As demand grows, there will be ever more VR titles for every niche, helping the growth further.
Personally I have high hopes for Quest 3 in 2023 and Quest 4 in 2025 (?) each being a big multiplier (1.5-2x?) for adoption.
botfiddler t1_iy3l7xa wrote
VR was obviously here to stay, because of all the monitors we have. Mass output of cheap high resolution screens. Though, these screens aren't 8k or even more. Much less of a mass market, much less demand outside of VR.
[deleted] t1_iy4hwgb wrote
Machine learning will do wonders for many industries (VR included) even before AGI coalesces.
The trend in cost of computing is clear, but it's not occurring in an isolated environment. Countries around the globe have been experiencing some pretty major issues in the past few years.
VR continues to be a "nice to have" product. It needs more investment and time dedicated to it before it can become as ubiquitous as the smartphone. This has been made a bit more difficult due to the various socioeconomic issues occurring recently. Companies like Meta can no longer allocate as many funds to VR as when they first bought Oculus.
We will bounce back. We will create better VR. It will just take some more time.
CommunismDoesntWork t1_iy3qmoa wrote
Moore's law is all about hardware lol. But yeah, your intuition about smartphones is correct, Moore's law has slowed down.
arieart t1_iy3t5x9 wrote
Moore's law isn't too lawlike
FiFoFree t1_iy3w98s wrote
Rapid iteration/advancement of hardware isn't quite here yet, but we do have reason to believe it's possible (cf. additive manufacturing/3D printing). We can pump out software quickly because we've removed a lot of the bottlenecks for doing so (e.g. using IDEs with keyboards and mice rather than punch cards or manually toggling switches) and made the ability to code widely available (allowing for massively collaborative software projects).
Hardware has a pipeline, and that pipeline is pretty constricted at the moment in comparison to software, but that doesn't mean it will be that way forever.
UncertainAboutIt t1_iy6v66g wrote
> We can pump out software quickly
Cardboard is there for many years now. How easy and quick to develop Linux VR desktop for smartphones? I'm waiting for it long time, even ordinary GNU/Linux - AKAIK only one modern smartphone runs it (pine), whereas all desktops/laptops I now run Linux more or less (for less I mean Mac).
E.g. even for pine it now takes years for make e-ink reader with Linux, AFAIK they sell still for developers only.
Netwelle t1_iy4satv wrote
It seems that dedicated chips for AR glasses are only now being developed and close to manufacturing. I believe ARM has a chip designed from scratch for this application. I believe with the big push for web3 and Metaverse that now is the time. Before this point there has not been corporate backing for the application. Now that every big company wants to push into this market, the funding is available.
I bet we see it accelerate heavily in the next 2-3yrs.
Adventurous_Whale t1_iy4vxiw wrote
The software is also a big problem. VR game controls are still a general mess.
Agreeable_Sun3754 t1_iy5sugw wrote
>my error is my inclination to try to apply Moore's law to every type of technology.
Nah your error is not understanding how exponentials work. Doubling every couple of years still means at the begining it takes 20-50 years to hit the inflection of the exponential curve.
KeltisHigherPower t1_iy5d5e1 wrote
Also, I can't help but think if someone like Facebook for instance had a huge advance, that they would shelve it and keep the advances at a drip pace because that will feed sales. If they jumped right to something that skipped over all of their other research they would lose out on years of revenue just edging out others. But maybe not.
Prayers4Wuhan t1_iy817yd wrote
- blackberry and Nokia introduced in 1998 and 1999
That was the beginning of the cell phone movement.
- The first iPhone wasn’t launched until 2007
- Galaxy S was launched in 2010
That was the beginning of the smartphone movement.
But smartphones didn’t really become polished until 2017-2022
The iPhone X released in 2017 and the android pixel 4 released in 2019 appear to me to be “peak smartphone technology”
It took a full 20 years to go from a Nokia to an iPhone X.
But it only took 10 years to go from an iPhone to an iPhone X.
-
Cardboard VR was released 2014
-
Oculus rift introduced 2016 (not the dev version)
-
Oculus quest released 2019
-
valve index 2019
-
The expensive oculus 2022
Seems right on schedule honestly. Cardboard VR is the Nokia and valve index and oculus quest are the iPhone and android versions etc.
I think the sticker shock of the expensive meta vr is due to zuck price gouging the quest to try to create market dominance. VR will probably be as expensive as new iPhones.
Apple still needs to make a VR.
By 2034 VR should be fully polished for consumers.
VR gloves, walking/running and of course visual quality indistinguishable from real life.
Same_Mirror3641 t1_iy4hzdt wrote
Yea Kurzweil is way too optimistic, the guy thought (maybe still does?) That he is gonna live forever. No man. I'm 31, I'm not even gonna live forever...Ray is like 70 already??
s2ksuch t1_iy4pqfy wrote
Ok nostradamus, glad you can see your future so clearly
Same_Mirror3641 t1_iy99sr1 wrote
Wait are you one of these people who think they are gonna live forever? Hate to tell ya bud, you might be disappointed one day lol
kimmeljs t1_iy3531g wrote
And if it were, the human vestibular)visual system hasn't adapted
Superduperbals t1_iy3mw17 wrote
Why can’t we just have a little computer with a good GPU and an antenna that locally streams PC content to a lightweight display instead of insisting on packing all our apps onto a piece of shit Android APK?
nebson10 t1_iy3s98k wrote
Lag is more important in VR than in possibly any other application.
grafixcoder t1_iy4kpz4 wrote
You already have that with Virtual Desktop and AirLink on these Mobile VR HMDs.
The issue is that it requires a somewhat decent gaming PC (with a reasonable gaming GPU) and newer Wifi hardware (Wifi 6 compatible router).
The market of those users is small right now, so most devs focus on the Android/APK apps since it's a much larger addressable market.
MightyDickTwist t1_iy8bcs1 wrote
Yep. It’s still high-end stuff, aimed mostly at enthusiasts.
rixtil41 t1_iy4lx1y wrote
We could but stream gaming to the other side of the world with as low latency as a 1 millisecond monitor will never be possible. The speed of light to other half of the world and back will be over 100 milliseconds which is unacceptable. To get streaming as good as a millisecond monitor the server or data center would have to be no father than about 93 miles or 149 kilometers away from where your streaming.
Superduperbals t1_iy7f16h wrote
I mean streaming locally. Just a few meters from a box in your living room to the headset on your face. The box being a computer with better specs than a 2012 android phone.
FezNt t1_iy5j8oi wrote
My/our take on how to solve that: https://juicelabs.substack.com/p/how-to-save-the-metaverse-22-09-12
Sieventer t1_iy8nt6b wrote
Basically we need cloud gaming in VR.
FezNt t1_iy8shvq wrote
Well, not exactly... The ideal situation offloads just the GPU to the cloud/edge/local box, with the applications still running on the headset. Therefore no change to applications already designed to run on the headset (except that they can be developed assuming more GPU is available!) Check out the last diagram in the article for what I mean.
HeinrichTheWolf_17 t1_iy3s85x wrote
/thread
nomoreprocrastin8ing t1_iy6i7gc wrote
You could probably get an incredibly sophisticated AR system using a big brand new workhorse of a GPU and a fancy camera if you don’t mind wearing a 5kg skullcap, but you won’t be walking anywhere with it so you might as well just get a cheap 2nd/3rd/nth monitor and another HDMI port.
I wouldn’t be surprised if the hardware is compact enough for on-the-go semi-reliable AR in 10-15 years, but there’s probably a lot of more complicated issues than moore’s law such as batteries and thermal issues
genshiryoku t1_iy3x6rq wrote
Yeah Moore's Law has essentially ended. The fastest silicon computers we'll ever build will only be 1 or 2 orders of magnitude faster than current computers.
We need to find out smart ways to conserve computing power like making an AI render images less accurately or faking complexity in other ways.
Unless we move to graphene CPUs or any other substrate different from Silicon we'll probably never get very good VR.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments