The Verge article claims 15ms latency, which honestly is really good, even if that's in addition to what you'd get if you were using a traditional internet connection.
The umami was the only differentiating factor and even there it was like a small difference. I eat meat, tried the burger because if can cut out a little meat why not? The impossible burger was exceptional enough a replacement that if its on the menu, I'll order it.
Didn't IBM just buy Red Hat for $34 Billion? Can you imagine a future where Amazon acquires Docker to optimize it to run on AWS and perhaps perform a bit worse on GCP. Any small advantage you could get in the space would equate to large changes with as ubiquitous Docker is and as large as AWS is.
My great grandmother was reading a pulp magazine about man going to the moon when she was young, her father made a point to check that she understood that such things were impossible if not extremely far off in the future. The only reason I know this story is that she survived to watch the moon landings and told my father, who told me. The moral of the story was always that it's very hard to predict technological growth, in particular, we tend to undershoot with our long term predictions. Personally I tend to be more weary of people that claim something won't happen in my lifetime than people that tell me something will happen.
The battery and solar operations side of TSLA are critical to spaceX's mission to Mars. Can't have a martian colony without being able to harvest and store energy. Additionally the CV being done at Tesla could prove critical in automating prefabrication of living spaces and life support infrastructure. Can't be doing anything like that remote controlled with 8 min latency.
I think the gaming potential is huge, it would take games like Pokemon GO and turn them into something like Pokemon Stadium, or can you imagine playing Wizards Chess? Obviously gaming isn't something that makes something must have, its just the area I've thought the most about. I guess I have a hard time imagining that a tool as robust as AR(especially if you add leap motion) would fail to find a set of "killer apps" that make it a market phenomenon.
People picked up SnapChat though, then used it to send really intimate content. Like I see your point, but I don't think consumers are that smart when they're getting dopamine hits.
A core component of any AR headset for everyday use is going to be that it not only has to be stylish, it has to be chic. I think Apple is the only one of the frightful five that have that kind of brand power. I have serious doubts that ML has a culture that can be molded to produce a product that has that aura around it. I can 100% see ML becoming part of Google, especially considering Google's stake in ML.
Of course its going to be a mass market phenomenon. Its going to be a mass market phenomenon for the same reason the smart phone was a phenomenon. It takes the internet which in the smartphone's case was something you had to go seek out at a desktop or computer and put it in your pocket. It took a dopamine hit and put it in your pocket.
AR is the same thing, it takes the dopamine hit and puts it on your face. Subsequently you get a lot more dopamine hits.
I believe Apple will win this race, for this reason. They aren't talking about what they're doing but they are very much preparing developers to develop AR tech on their device with swift and ARKit as well as the capabilities of the A11.
I suspect that by the time Apple starts signaling that they've got a headset and announce it at WWDCXX its going to feel like it fell straight out of the year 3000.
On the other hand posting a dodgy opinion on facebook et al largely removes you from the social and physical consequences of saying things that are way outside of societal norms. When you're able to hide behind a screen the range of things you're willing to say increases as does your potential reach. I would argue it completely changes the context to which the ideas of free speech have been classically prescribed. Its worthy of discussion to question do the underlying ideals of free speech apply in this brave new world, or do we need to look at tweaking our ideals to fit the contexts in which we live. I don't have answers, nor would I ever suggest restricting free speech more, I'm just questioning does it make sense to apply it in this domain.
The 24/7/365 aspect can be solved by moving them sufficiently underground. Underground environments are naturally the yearly average temperature of the surface.
The new part of the article is the previously unnoticed role of the epididymis. It turned out that upon entering the epididymis sperm shed a bunch of small RNAs(which play a major role in epigenetic expression) and then reaquire small RNA's that reflect more closely the father's environment, later along in the duct.
See you removed your wallet though, they'd rather you didn't remove your wallet at all, they'd rather you vote by reporting toxic players and keep your wallet around. ;)
Cheating is incredibly toxic in the community, even a whiff of it and people start labeling each other scripters etc. Riot does a lot of work to make their community suck less, lots of player leave or drop engagement because the community is toxic. With that in mind I'd imagine the optimal amount of cheating is less than what they can achieve.
When I read such reports I try to assume the worst is true, in this example that cell phone towers do in fact cause increased rates of cancer, however minuscule. Then I ask, is this a cost that we as a society are willing to bear for value add of the thing in question. In this case, I think the increase in cancer rates would have to be astronomically high for us to say that's too dangerous.