Creator

FOSS has in fact, printed their stance it on a T shirt, and subsequently told the world about it. It's actually one of their flagship contributions to the world.

What is different with the standard flow of the presentation of Terms of Service is more like being presented with the documentation and destination fees, and any other fees on the tail end of a car purchase, after you've talked at great length about THE price. For you see, the sales person conveniently considers those as completely different, and very odd to bundle together with the actual cost of the car.

It comes back to my original point. FOSS isn't switching narrative voices throughout their legal document. They actually want you to truly understand what you are agreeing too, because assuming good intentions, the goals of the users of FOSS align with the goals of the creators of FOSS. Contrast that with Magic Leaps TOS. Why else would you layer in persuasive, folksy, nonthreatening ad copy with your legalese, except to shape any negative opinion I might arrive at through only reading the legalese. Thats because their goals are profit at the expense of their customers, which necessarily means adversarial relationships with those customers, on some level.

Even in the case where copyright ownership is assigned to the project owner, it is a very different situation than the case where your created content is just hosted on a service that claims rights to it.

0: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.en.html#AssignCopyright

The most hardcore would create their own DevKits.

http://devkits.handheldmuseum.com/

Nowhere on that page does it say anything about "goggles-free AR". Heck, the page is so vague it's not even 100% clear it's talking about AR at all.

If you went and misinterpreted that vague marketing teaser as a promise of pie-in-the-sky technology, that's on you.

People claim that their products can solve all sorts of interesting problems every day, and it's easy to get excited. But if they cannot demonstrate that their product actually can do what they say it does, then people are going to get suspicious.

Combine the lack of transparency with the long lead times that consumer hardware devices tend to have, and people will start wondering why nobody has been allowed to interact with a live demo of the product when it's supposed to be available to anyone within 9 months.

Everyone wants a product like this to work, but we're also worried about getting taken in by little more than slick marketing; that's how you get companies like Theranos.

>>Instead of putting energy into this I'd suggest pointing the energy towards creating something yourself.

attitude. Just because I don't play football doesn't mean I cannot criticize the coach. Just because I'm not in politics doesn't mean I cannot criticize politicians.

Lots of promises, lots of hype, a crap ton of money poured into it... and then basically nothing of substance for years.

Eventually, when it is finally released it'll likely be very underwhelming (so far they really are just showing normal hardware for the space, so they're already there).

It's not surprising people are negative - they've given us nothing to be positive about and lots to criticize. I'm more suspicious of those who are positive about them at this point.

I, for one, /did/ try creating something at that company. Instead all I got was a cut in pay, overwork, and a lack of career prospects while still being required to play roles with rediculous levels of responsibility under working conditions even OSHA would find intolerable.

Mind you, this was all happening while being told that my many years of experience actually shipping consumer products at other companies was worthless and that the failed leadership forklifted from Nokia would save the day as they proceeded to continue making short-sighted decisions and ignoring the experience they hired.

No, I will /happily/ sit back and watch and heckle. And why am I not starting my own thing? Because when they fail to deliver the ill-defined "magic" they so heartily promise, they will destroy an entire field I used to have faith in actually taking off. Funding will dry up and VCs will turn away after this fiasco.

Believe what you want, but keep your accusations of lack of trying to yourself.

I watched a couple of minutes of that video and couldn't see any physical representations of the product. Can you link to the point in the video where the device is shown?

Sure, but those companies have long track records of shipping stuff.

Actually, to my knowledge, Apple doesn't do this. All their product photography are photos of real objects.