Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Marc Renouf renouf@********.com
Subject: Virtual Realities 3.0
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 13:46:57 -0400 (EDT)
On Wed, 26 Jul 2000, Drew Curtis wrote:

> This wouldn't work, as in my Jurassic Park example above. We're talking
> about taking functionality that operates as fast as you can type and
> slowing it down to taking several minutes for no obvious practical
> gain. Again, that makes the game less fun so it's a toss up in my mind.

Certainly, and point-and-click takes longer than typing in a
line command in most instances. But it's more intuitive, and has made
computers easier to use. I see a VR interpretation and rendering of the
Matrix as more of the same. Yes, it may take a little longer, but any
idiot can figure it out.
Further, I'm not sure it actually would take longer. Keep in mind
that navigation is happening more or less at the speed of thought. I can
think my sentences a *hell* of a lot faster than I can type them. That
kind of ASIST capability alone will speed up productivity immensely.
There's no reason to suppose that other computer operations might not get
a similar boost from direct neural interface. VR is just a way of making
that interface user friendly.

Marc
Message no. 2
From: Tzeentch tzeentch666@*********.net
Subject: Virtual Realities 3.0
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 11:59:57 -0700
From: "Marc Renouf" <renouf@********.com>
> On Wed, 26 Jul 2000, Drew Curtis wrote:
> > This wouldn't work, as in my Jurassic Park example above. We're talking
> > about taking functionality that operates as fast as you can type and
> > slowing it down to taking several minutes for no obvious practical
> > gain. Again, that makes the game less fun so it's a toss up in my mind.

I think you're overstating things when you say "several minutes."

> Certainly, and point-and-click takes longer than typing in a
> line command in most instances. But it's more intuitive, and has made
> computers easier to use. I see a VR interpretation and rendering of the
> Matrix as more of the same. Yes, it may take a little longer, but any
> idiot can figure it out.

I actually don't consider a simsense or VR interface to be overly superior
to an advanced GUI. In fact in may ways it would be inferior, especially
since I really doubt that a VR interface is any more intuitive. Then we have
the insane overhead that it would bring to network traffic (although
assuming everyone in SR is wired with fiber and they're using some insanely
advanced WDM and decoding equipment its not a big deal).

> Further, I'm not sure it actually would take longer. Keep in mind
> that navigation is happening more or less at the speed of thought. I can
> think my sentences a *hell* of a lot faster than I can type them. That
> kind of ASIST capability alone will speed up productivity immensely.
> There's no reason to suppose that other computer operations might not get
> a similar boost from direct neural interface. VR is just a way of making
> that interface user friendly.

I would dispute that. People don't think all that linearly - I think a "mind
reading" interface would be a real pain in the ass to learn how to use. Plus
you have to throw quite a lot of "AMO" technology at the problem to make it
work as it does in SR to begin with. Imagine if your word process COULD read
your mind, it would quickly be a jumble of words and ideas, you would be
typing along then suddenly "Hmm I'm hungry."

Kenneth
Message no. 3
From: Drew Curtis dcurtis@***.net
Subject: Virtual Realities 3.0
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 16:11:48 -0400 (EDT)
On Wed, 26 Jul 2000, Tzeentch wrote:

> From: "Marc Renouf" <renouf@********.com>
> > On Wed, 26 Jul 2000, Drew Curtis wrote:
> > > This wouldn't work, as in my Jurassic Park example above. We're talking
> > > about taking functionality that operates as fast as you can type and
> > > slowing it down to taking several minutes for no obvious practical
> > > gain. Again, that makes the game less fun so it's a toss up in my mind.
>
> I think you're overstating things when you say "several minutes."
>
Probably. I was recalling the Jurassic Park scene where that's how long
it took. That actually was what was building the tension: could the girl
navigate the system in time?

> > Certainly, and point-and-click takes longer than typing in a
> > line command in most instances. But it's more intuitive, and has made
> > computers easier to use. I see a VR interpretation and rendering of the
> > Matrix as more of the same. Yes, it may take a little longer, but any
> > idiot can figure it out.
>
> I actually don't consider a simsense or VR interface to be overly superior
> to an advanced GUI. In fact in may ways it would be inferior, especially
> since I really doubt that a VR interface is any more intuitive. Then we have
> the insane overhead that it would bring to network traffic (although
> assuming everyone in SR is wired with fiber and they're using some insanely
> advanced WDM and decoding equipment its not a big deal).
>
No doubt what would happen would be similar to what happens today. There
are GUIs for unix, but most sysadmins just want a command line. That's
not to say the GUI isn't useful however. Just that deckers wouldn't be as
interested. You can't hack crapola with a GUI.

> > Further, I'm not sure it actually would take longer. Keep in mind
> > that navigation is happening more or less at the speed of thought. I can
> > think my sentences a *hell* of a lot faster than I can type them. That
> > kind of ASIST capability alone will speed up productivity immensely.
> > There's no reason to suppose that other computer operations might not get
> > a similar boost from direct neural interface. VR is just a way of making
> > that interface user friendly.
>
> I would dispute that. People don't think all that linearly - I think a "mind
> reading" interface would be a real pain in the ass to learn how to use. Plus
> you have to throw quite a lot of "AMO" technology at the problem to make it
> work as it does in SR to begin with. Imagine if your word process COULD read
> your mind, it would quickly be a jumble of words and ideas, you would be
> typing along then suddenly "Hmm I'm hungry."
>
Or "Man I hate writing this boring stuff for my stupid boss. Wonder if
there's any porn on TV"

Drew Curtis President DCR.NET (502)226-3376
Local Internet access: Frankfort Lawrenceburg Shelbyville Owenton
Louisville Lexington Versailles Nicholasville Midway

http://www.fark.com: If it's not news, it's fark.
Message no. 4
From: kawaii trunks@********.org
Subject: Virtual Realities 3.0
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 16:17:57 -0400
From: "Tzeentch" <tzeentch666@*********.net>
Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2000 2:59 PM


> > Further, I'm not sure it actually would take longer. Keep in mind
> > that navigation is happening more or less at the speed of thought. I
can
> > think my sentences a *hell* of a lot faster than I can type them. That
> > kind of ASIST capability alone will speed up productivity immensely.
> > There's no reason to suppose that other computer operations might not
get
> > a similar boost from direct neural interface. VR is just a way of
making
> > that interface user friendly.
>
> I would dispute that. People don't think all that linearly - I think a
"mind
> reading" interface would be a real pain in the ass to learn how to use.
Plus
> you have to throw quite a lot of "AMO" technology at the problem to make
it
> work as it does in SR to begin with. Imagine if your word process COULD
read
> your mind, it would quickly be a jumble of words and ideas, you would be
> typing along then suddenly "Hmm I'm hungry."
>
> Kenneth
>

I would imagine that the ASIST interface is not a "mind reading" interface.
In network terminology, I would imagine that it is an "interface" that you
have to consciously "route" commands to. Like when you are thinking,
"Download File Alpha-Omega-Kill-All-Elves", you have mentally "send"
the
command to that specific datajack interface, while "I'm hungry" is not. =)

While not *really* as fast as the speed of thought, it is certainly a lot
faster than typing. =P

Ever lovable and always scrappy,
kawaii
Message no. 5
From: Andrew Gryphon webmaster@*********.com
Subject: Virtual Realities 3.0
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 01:23:42 -0500
on 7/26/00 12:46 PM, Marc Renouf at renouf@********.com e-scribed:

> Further, I'm not sure it actually would take longer. Keep in mind
> that navigation is happening more or less at the speed of thought. I can
> think my sentences a *hell* of a lot faster than I can type them. That
> kind of ASIST capability alone will speed up productivity immensely.
> There's no reason to suppose that other computer operations might not get
> a similar boost from direct neural interface. VR is just a way of making
> that interface user friendly.

Big advantage: No "Mavis Beacon Teaches Decking." Yes, faster, but not speed
of thought per se. You still need to train your mind to give the proper
commands. They already have headsets where you can control computers by
brainwaves. I've seen a demonstration of a guy flying a flight sim (very
rough) by thinking "up," "left," etc. He had to actually think the
commands
(or rather, the directions), not just picture it going down. The upshot? A
whole new version of DOS! Actually, more like BASIC. Simple to use, yet
still requires training. I guess some people had problems with mice when
they first came into use, too. Obviously, by 2050+, the tech would be more
refined. The demo I mentioned must've been 10 years ago.

--
Andrew Gryphon
http://www.Wyrmworks.com
Taking Role-Playing to the next level
Message no. 6
From: Andrew Gryphon webmaster@*********.com
Subject: Virtual Realities 3.0
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 01:27:02 -0500
on 7/26/00 1:59 PM, Tzeentch at tzeentch666@*********.net e-scribed:

> I actually don't consider a simsense or VR interface to be overly superior
> to an advanced GUI. In fact in may ways it would be inferior, especially
> since I really doubt that a VR interface is any more intuitive. Then we have
> the insane overhead that it would bring to network traffic (although
> assuming everyone in SR is wired with fiber and they're using some insanely
> advanced WDM and decoding equipment its not a big deal).

The trick is some kind of miracle compression/decompression protocol, I'd
think. As far as VR being superior/inferior, a few years ago, Apple came out
with a browser plug-in called "HotSauce". It allowed for 3D browsing. Never
took off, & they abandoned it. That said, I have a hunch people just weren't
ready for it. Never got to try it myself.

--
Andrew Gryphon
http://www.Wyrmworks.com
Taking Role-Playing to the next level
Message no. 7
From: Tzeentch tzeentch666@*********.net
Subject: Virtual Realities 3.0
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 23:22:33 -0700
From: "Andrew Gryphon" <webmaster@*********.com>
> Big advantage: No "Mavis Beacon Teaches Decking." Yes, faster, but not
speed
> of thought per se. You still need to train your mind to give the proper
> commands. They already have headsets where you can control computers by
> brainwaves. I've seen a demonstration of a guy flying a flight sim (very
> rough) by thinking "up," "left," etc. He had to actually think
the
commands
> (or rather, the directions), not just picture it going down. The upshot? A
> whole new version of DOS! Actually, more like BASIC. Simple to use, yet
> still requires training. I guess some people had problems with mice when
> they first came into use, too. Obviously, by 2050+, the tech would be more
> refined. The demo I mentioned must've been 10 years ago.

Of course that's pretty rough interpretation going on. How exactly 'trode
units transmit data as well as receive it is something of an "Who the Hell
knows" AMO technology. Since a simple datajack allows you to control a
datajack entirely through mental control (yeah....ookkk...) it can be
reasoned that perhaps there is some sort of "neural net" you can get
installed in your braincase even without an datajack that allows 'trode nets
to function.

Personally I would require an specialized cyberdeck DNI unit in order for
people to control decks entirely through mental command. Its a bit hard to
swallow that you can command a deck with extremely advanced commands with a
simple jack but driving a car is quite a task for just a datajack.

AMO= "A Miracle Occurs" btw

Kenneth
"On two occasions I have been asked, 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the
machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able to
apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a
question."
-- Charles Babbage
Message no. 8
From: Tzeentch tzeentch666@*********.net
Subject: Virtual Realities 3.0
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 23:30:09 -0700
From: "Andrew Gryphon" <webmaster@*********.com>
> The trick is some kind of miracle compression/decompression protocol, I'd
> think. As far as VR being superior/inferior, a few years ago, Apple came
out
> with a browser plug-in called "HotSauce". It allowed for 3D browsing.
Never
> took off, & they abandoned it. That said, I have a hunch people just
weren't
> ready for it. Never got to try it myself.

VR hasn't taken off yet for one simple reason: It Sucks. There just isn't a
demand or need for it right now. Despite all the hype abour VRML its just
not what people want or could use. In many cases an 3d interface would
actually get in the way of real useful work. Whoo you got a 3d word
processor? I bet you're 20 times more productive now ;) Most productivity
applications (bread and butter) work just fine in 2d with a icons thanks.
Making it 3d with real sensory input is stepping into pure silliness.
"Whoah, Word 2060 has even more annoying Agents, with simsense! And you can
FEEL the flowcharts in Excel! Wowza!"

If VR does come around it will be because of video games. That's really
whats driving the current computer market (you sure don't need an Athlon to
run Word) and will continue to drive new innovations. Especially with the
newer generation of game engines that could actually benefit from true 3-d
visualization. Just imagine in a few years when we'll look at HALO the same
way we look at Castle Wolfenstein and you'll see where the real market is.
It won't be Sony or IBM driving the tech, it will be id and Bungie and the
like.

Kenneth
"On two occasions I have been asked, 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the
machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able to
apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a
question."
-- Charles Babbage
Message no. 9
From: Andrew Gryphon webmaster@*********.com
Subject: Virtual Realities 3.0
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 01:42:50 -0500
on 7/26/00 3:17 PM, kawaii at trunks@********.org e-scribed:

> I would imagine that the ASIST interface is not a "mind reading" interface.
> In network terminology, I would imagine that it is an "interface" that you
> have to consciously "route" commands to. Like when you are thinking,
> "Download File Alpha-Omega-Kill-All-Elves", you have mentally
"send" the
> command to that specific datajack interface, while "I'm hungry" is not.
=)

Sort of like the Mac toy "PlainTalk," which allows you to say, "Computer,
Open Mi¢ro$oft Word," and it'll do it. Direct neural interface is much
faster.

> While not *really* as fast as the speed of thought, it is certainly a lot
> faster than typing. =P

Here's something to think about on this command-line vs. VR idea: pictures
are right brain. Command line is left brain, right? Which would be faster,
pictures which use right brain to achieve left brain concepts (like grabbing
a file), thus crossing between hemispheres, or command lines, keeping mostly
within the same hemisphere?

Of note, Mac OS X will have a command line available if you really want it,
but it'll be hidden from the average user. Could the matrix have command
line access? If so, what would the game mechanics effects be, given that you
could "type" at the speed of thought, as mentioned earlier?

--
Andrew Gryphon
http://www.Wyrmworks.com
Taking Role-Playing to the next level

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Virtual Realities 3.0, you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!