Figures: They Speak For Themselves (mildly NSFW) - <AUTHOR> http://dresdencodak.tumblr.com/post/3583964949/figures-they-speak-for-themselves-mildly-nsfw <comment><USER2> Another great example is Team Fortress 2. All the characters are carefully designed to be distinguishable at a glance - I remember seeing a great explanation of this a few years back, but can only find this pdf right now:

[http://www.valvesoftware.com/publications/2007/NPAR07_Illust...](http://www.valvesoftware.com/publications/2007/NPAR07_IllustrativeRenderingInTeamFortress2.pdf)

<comment><USER3> They kind of threw this out the window after all the hats and costumes, though.

<comment><USER4> It's all about the distinctive silhouettes of the character classes and how they move. Even with clothes you can quickly recognise a heavy, a pyro, a medic at a distance.

<comment><USER3> It's a lot harder though. The larger hats breaks up the silhouette quite a bit. At least you can still identify based on posture, which is done pretty well.

<comment><USER5> The Israeli military uses these: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitznefet_(Israeli_military)>

They're big floppy hats that go on top of the helmet to prevent the classic helmet silhouette look.

Works better because human bodies aren't quite as distinctive as TF2 classes :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> This reminds me a bit of the DOTA 2 Character Art guide. Valve takes it a step further and states that a character must be identifiable by only its silhouette - including orientation and carried weapons. It's a pretty good read, even with just a passing interest in game & character art. [http://media.steampowered.com/apps/dota2/workshop/Dota2Chara...](http://media.steampowered.com/apps/dota2/workshop/Dota2CharacterArtGuide.pdf)

<comment><USER7> They really have succeeded. I can tell which each of those heroes is by just the silhouette. Interesting read, thanks.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Aaron Diaz is amazing. The time travel/transhumanism comic Hob is greatly recommended ( <http://dresdencodak.com/2007/02/08/pom/> ).

<comment><AUTHOR> There are many webcomics out there that are strictly better from both a plotting and dialog standpoint--however, for simply having delightful art and interesting character design, Dresden Codak is wonderful.

I'm a bit skeptical of the current Kickstarter, but here's hoping, you know?

<comment><USER9> OK, confused. "Current" Kickstarter? Is there more than one? Because the one that he finished seemed to fund quite well.

Skeptical that it will be late? Well, given the _normal_ DC schedule, that wouldn't surprise me a lot. But I don't fund projects on Kickstarter expecting a particular delivery date like it's a store. So if it arrives in November I'll still be happy.

<comment><AUTHOR> It's funded, to the tune of a half million--I'm curious if he'll actually be able to deliver. I hope so.

<comment><USER10> Dresden Codak has been a fully sustainable job for Aaron Diaz for years now - this is his profession. He has also participated in at least one collaborative Kickstarter that has already delivered. Given that the professionals that have been doing the Kickstarter thing this year have largely done very well, and he already has a track record of delivering, why are you so skeptical?

<comment><USER11> The Erfworld Kickstarter pretty much bankrupted its author. FYI. He started a new Kickstarter with blessing from the KS people, which... I can't say I am happy with. Especially since he's already promising stretch goals again.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Strange, I've never heard the term "figure drawing" used in the context of comics or animation. Maybe it's common within the field, but the artists I know generally associate it with drawing human models. Wikipedia doesn't mention it either.

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Figure_drawing>

Interesting post though. I liked seeing the Cowboy Bebop characters again, and the point about the need for the body to be identifiable without clothes makes a lot of sense.

<comment><USER13> There's a book by Walt Stanchfield (former head of animation at Disney) named "Figure drawing for animation" Although the name may have changed, it used to be a photocopied book passing from hand to hand, but I read it was about to be properly published.

Edit: memory failure (just woke up, I guess it counts as an excuse) The book is /Gesture/ drawing for animation, not figure drawing. I mentally mixed the article content with your reference :) The book is great, though.

<comment><USER12> Sounds neat, thanks!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> If you're interested in reading more tips about cartoon drawing technique, there's a relevant book I've read some of, How to Make Webcomics: [http://www.amazon.com/How-Make-Webcomics-Scott- Kurtz/dp/1582...](http://www.amazon.com/How-Make-Webcomics-Scott- Kurtz/dp/158240870X). I sampled a few chapters in a bookstore and remember that the author of PVP gave very similar advice, which I found interesting reading. I'm not skilled enough to evaluate the book's drawing advice, but it looked like the authors knew what they were talking about. Though I'd caution that their advice seemed skewed to comics that update often and have a relatively simple drawing style, as opposed to the kind of comic that releases a detailed full-color page once a week.

<comment><USER15> Did you just point out that Scott Kurtz (one of the authors of that book) gave some advice similar to that given by Scott Kurtz (author of PvP)?

(hopefully the humour/snark part of that comment doesn't overwhelm the information part)

<comment><USER14> No, I meant that Scott Kurtz (the book co-author and PvP author), in his book, gave very similar advice to Aaron Diaz, the author of this "Figures" blog post. But I see how my wording was ambiguous.

<comment><USER15> Then my apologies. =]

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> The rest of the "comic theory" series: <http://dresdencodak.tumblr.com/tagged/design> I think my favorite is "Primary and Secondary: A Tale of Two Focal Points". (Note the "Drawing Hands" one has a nude girl, but she's curled up and doesn't show anything. And of course the "Figures" one from OP is in there too.)

</comment><comment><USER17> I am an avid fan of the Walking Dead comic books, but this is the #1 problem I have with the art: I can't tell the difference between the characters. Many of the characters look the same, especially the female characters, so the story gets confusing, especially when you only buy the trade paperback every few months.

</comment><comment><USER18> Not exactly 'mildly' by any united states standard... interesting post though.

<comment><USER18> I guess this is what I get for trying to be informative by pointing out that the post's content is in fact definitely, most very not-safe-for work: downvotes and ranting from the HN hivemind about how I'm oppressing art with my puritan American worldview, or something.

Let's enumerate the things I didn't do here:

\- Say this post shouldn't be on HN

\- Say the post is inappropriate for viewing by anyone

\- Say the post was porn or smut

\- Say anything is wrong with the post

I know tons of people who read HN at work, but screw those people, right?

<comment><USER19> It's your broad claim "by any United States standard" that's likely the cause of the downvotes.

Lots of US people here work in places where these two non-pruriently-posed cartoon nudes, used for a valid illustrative purpose, present no 'safety' problem.

Please don't make the US work environment seem more prude or homogenous than it actually is. This is not "definitely, most very not-safe-for-work". It depends on where you work. That makes "mildly NSFW" a fair description - it's enough of a warning for those in very sensitive environments, while allowing that in other places it'd be considered harmless.

<comment><USER18> I've never encountered a work environment where viewing those drawings at work would be defensible unless you were actually an artist.

Note that I'm not saying that this would be a firable offense, but that someone could easily complain to HR about it and it could be considered creating a hostile work environment if it makes them feel unwelcome. These things matter!

<comment><USER19> And I've never worked anyplace where it would be a problem. Which refutes your categorical pronouncements about nationally-consistent standards.

Everyone's got an anecdote!

<comment><USER18> Well, if you're demanding standards, you could spend a few seconds looking up the definition of sexual harassment in the workplace:

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hostile_environment_sexual_hara...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hostile_environment_sexual_harassment)

You'll notice 'pictures of pornography in cubicles' is one of them.

<http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/currentissues.html> (a government website, note) mentions specific cases where visible pornography counted as establishing a hostile work environment.

<comment><USER20> In an ancestor comment you (correctly) noted that you hadn't said this post was porn. Now you are all but saying exactly that. Which is it?

<comment><USER18> I'll make my point again: The problem is not that the content is or isn't pornography; the problem is that the content can be considered pornography by a viewer. It doesn't matter whether _I_ think it's pornography, it's whether the person at the desk across from me does. If they think it's pornography, they're well within their rights to file an HR complaint if it makes them uncomfortable.

Which is why it's good to have clear 'NSFW' warnings on things that might be inappropriate in the workplace. Trying to get really specific about what might be appropriate doesn't do anyone much good; just tag it NSFW if it's remotely questionable and people can check it out at home. Make sense?

Visible genitals - whether male or female - are often considered not appropriate for general audiences in the US. So it is not exactly crazy to assume that someone might be made uncomfortable or upset by a coworker viewing them at work.

<comment><USER21> Nudity is not pornography. I don't think it's healthy to assume others are so crazy as to call this blog post pornography.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> "using hair alone to distinguish heads is cheating" xkcd might disagree :)

<comment><USER23> He explicitly mentions stick figures that can be better than photorealistic painting as readers of xkcd might agree.

But take the Scott Pilgrim stories, everybody looks mostly the same except for hairstyles. I remember there is also a joke by one of the characters that everybody looks the same anyway.

I'd say, these are suggestions and not hard rules. You might get away disregarding some of these.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> What a surprise: the only naked figures are a) women and b) cute.

<comment><USER16> They are also c) the main characters in his webcomic.

<comment><USER25> To be fair, it is a reasonable criticism of Aaron Diaz - he frequently posts feminist-commentary and lambasts others for using sex to sell comics, but he throws a lot of pin-up worthy cheesecake in his work.</comment></comment></comment>


Skeptical Authors on Climate Science - <AUTHOR> http://www.eecg.utoronto.ca/~prall/climate/skeptic_authors_table.html

<comment><USER2> A reply by " _Enemy of the State Number #38_ ": [http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/writing-for-pjm-helped-make- me-...](http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/writing-for-pjm-helped-make-me-enemy-of- the-state-number-38/?singlepage=true)

Which is a fair characterization as the root source, a _Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences_ (i.e. the official publication of record for a unit of the government) article ([http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2010/06/04/1003187107.full...](http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2010/06/04/1003187107.full.pdf+html)) links to this page and " _argues that the skeptical scientists — the article calls us 'climate deniers,' trying to equate us with Holocaust deniers — have published less in climate "science" than believers in anthropogenic global warming (AGW)._ "

As the author says:

" _Professor Freeman Dyson of the Institute for Advanced Study, a member of the National Academy of Sciences and a fellow of the Royal Society, is number 3 on the list. Dyson is a friend of mine and is one of the creators of relativistic quantum field theory; most physicists think he should have shared the Nobel Prize in Physics with Richard Feynman. MIT professor Richard Lindzen, a meteorologist who is also a member of the National Academy, is number 4. Princeton physics professor William Happer, once again a member of the National Academy of Sciences, is number 6.

I'm in good company._"

And let me preemptively further Goodwin this thread with a few quotes from the comments:

" _This sort of reminds me of when Hitler got several hundred scientists to sign (on pain of death) a letter declaring Einstein was wrong. Einstein's famous retort was: 'If I was wrong if would not take hundreds, it would only take one.'_ "

(Einstein was _very_ rigorous about demanding proof, e.g. he said about one of his relativity theories that he would not accept it as being right unless several specified experiments all produced the predicted results.)

" _The National Academy of Sciences clearly has no sense of irony.

While using the term "denier" in order to associate those with non-aligned views with Nazi sympathisers, it uses exactly the same tactic which was used in Hitler's Germany to suppress so called "Degenerate art" (Entartete Kunst)._"</comment>


LLV8 – An experimental top-tier compiler for V8 - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/ispras/llv8 <comment><USER2> Am I reading this right? This seems to be an alternate V8 with a slower JIT startup but faster JITted results for situations like running a Node server for weeks at a time as opposed to popping around between web sites in Chrome.

<comment><USER3> Yes that's what it looks like.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Any execution or compilation time benchmarks? I'd expect LLV8 to be much slower than TurboFan for native codegen, but if the runtime benefits are greater, this might be a good fit for server side JS applications

<comment><USER5> Or for long-running JavaScript components. V8 doesn't optimize code with TurboFan right away; it does it for hotspot functions that look optimizable.

This would especially make sense along with an "optimized cocde cache": cache pre-compiled optimized versions of JavaScript, such as common JavaScript libraries, based on hash.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Isn't this kind of like what WebKit was doing with FTLJIT before phasing it out in favor of B3?

<comment><USER7> Yep: [https://webkit.org/blog/3362/introducing-the-webkit-ftl- jit/](https://webkit.org/blog/3362/introducing-the-webkit-ftl-jit/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> It would be interesting to see JavaScript bindings to the LLVM back-end so people could write new compiler front-ends in JavaScript. I see now that JavaScript bindings do exist but are not maintained:

[https://github.com/kevinmehall/node- llvm](https://github.com/kevinmehall/node-llvm) (2013)

[https://github.com/dirk/llvm2](https://github.com/dirk/llvm2) (2015)

<comment><USER9> > _I see now that JavaScript bindings do exist but are not maintained_

That's partially because the amount of API churn for LLVM _and_ for native Node.js bindings is high. It's actually a lot of work to keep up with LLVM in particular.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Since JavaScript is largely considered a terrible language by anyone who's spent enough time with various languages, I'm mostly looking forward to the impact this might have on _other_ arguably better languages that "compile to JS" such as Elm.

</comment><comment><USER11> Well this will be interesting. When are we going to see native binaries written in JS? After that will we see Operating Systems?

<comment><USER3> The code shown in this project's readme wouldn't work statically - can you see all the deoptimisation points in the generated code? It can only be made so fast because it has the option to bail out to the interpreter at any point.

<comment><USER12> V8 doesn't have an interpreter, so it doesn't bail out to one. It certainly bails out to its baseline compiler, though!

<comment><USER13> FYI [http://v8project.blogspot.com/2016/08/firing-up-ignition- int...](http://v8project.blogspot.com/2016/08/firing-up-ignition- interpreter.html)

<comment><USER12> Right—there's one coming, but it's not there yet.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I'm not sure how I fell about this. Part of me wants to think it's terrible, but I want to stay objective.</comment>


Proseline – Git for prose, in the browser - <AUTHOR> https://writing.kemitchell.com/2018/03/06/Proseline.html <comment><USER2> There's also [https://www.gitbook.com](https://www.gitbook.com)

I was looking to move off fiction.wikia.com, was looking into using gitbook, ended up only applying to their job listing, since it was easier to convert mediawiki into markdown[1] & dump it into a repo. Less than an hour going over the typesetting with a friend & GH pages was able to have the legible minimalism I sought[2]

[1] [https://github.com/serprex/serprex.github.io/blob/master/w/m...](https://github.com/serprex/serprex.github.io/blob/master/w/mwmd.py) [2] [https://serprex.github.io/w/A%20Knight's%20Left%20Sword](https://serprex.github.io/w/A%20Knight's%20Left%20Sword)

</comment><comment><USER3> _Proseline is the collaborating parts of Docs without the complex, Word-like parts of Docs._

Google Docs has 'Full Screen Mode' in the View menu that hides all the Word- like menus and functions as a very useful distraction-free UI.

<comment><USER4> That's true. But there's way more of Word that I'd rather do without.

Comments and edits are complex in Word. There's no clear way to do the starting point - comment - edit - resolution flow that we're familiar with as pull requests or traditional document turns. Track Changes works as intended, but creates complex mismatches between the state of a document and the state of a document to which a comment referred. Versioning is difficult. Almost everyone does it with multiple copies. Clean and redline copies. And so on.

I prepare and negotiate legal documents every day. That practice is almost entirely Word based. Most tech-savvy practitioners have a brief spree with features they discover and master---automatic numbering, cross-references, style separators, tables of contents, and so on. In time, we tend to work back to a lowest common denominator, for simplicity and ease of collaboration. The best way to prepare a transaction document is often to treat Word as much like a typewriter as possible. As a rule of thumb, if you can't safely export to RTF, someone will mangle your document at some point. It may be you.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Did proseline.com do anything for anybody? Is it supposed to? Trying to create/open an actual draft crashes for me on both Firefox and Chrome (with different errors).

<comment><USER6> I was intrigued, but could not get it to work. I found the UI very confusing.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> I really like new projects like this. It's simple, it's got a neat idea and I like GIT (use it every day), but I couldn't even figure out how to edit my original document, and when I tried multiple browsers, the interaction was confusing. I hope he improves this, because I like the concept.

<comment><USER4> Thanks for your note.

My first commits on this project were in November of last year, and I only really started developing it actively last month. I didn't post here on HN, and I think that's premature.

To fill in with a hint that the UI itself should provide: There's no such thing as changing text of a draft in Proseline. Rather, you can create a new draft based on an old one, edit, and save. The relevant "Start a new draft based on this one." button is buried a bit at the bottom of draft pages right now.

<comment><USER7> Yes, it would be good to tweak the layout a bit to make it more obvious on how the workflow should be.

Starting over from a new copy every time doesn't fit with my understanding of either normal document editing or even GIT. This almost seems like "block- chain" <sigh>, it's that's appropriate. Therefore, it wasn't intuitive automatically on how to use the tool.

I have a friend who edits my work, and it's good to have someone help you see the forest through the trees, especially on interface design. (though I often don't like the suggestions, they are mostly right)

<comment><USER4> I've had some wonderful feedback from other folks, both for what to do about the editor experience, and also what to do about the UI, to make things more intuitive. Looking forward to spending more time on it soon.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I like the typography of the site where the article is on. Is there an open- source CSS stylesheet for it?

<comment><USER4> The typefaces are Matthew Butterick's [Equity]([https://typographyforlawyers.com/equity.html](https://typographyforlawyers.com/equity.html)) and [Concourse]([https://typographyforlawyers.com/concourse.html](https://typographyforlawyers.com/concourse.html)). Matthew sells broad licenses for a pretty reasonable fee, as custom type goes.

<comment><USER8> Thanks for the information! It makes for a readable and professional look.</comment></comment></comment>


Pictures from Volcano eruption in Chile - <AUTHOR> http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2011/06/volcano_erupts_in_chile.html

<comment><AUTHOR> The pictures give some context and realization into how the most powerful system around us is in fact - Nature.</comment>


The Oculus Quest 2 - <AUTHOR> https://www.facebookblueprint.com/student/activity/211338 <comment><USER2> Own a Quest (1), use it nearly daily, and like my Quest.

I won't even be looking at the Quest 2 because they now require a Facebook account to use it, and I have absolutely no interesting in that (from a privacy _or_ integrations standpoint).

I just want to game in peace. When I purchased my original Quest they were making guarantees that Facebook integrations were going to be optional, only to backtrack two years later.

<comment><USER3> What's your hard point about it?

Seems like a dummy, fake, account would provide what you need?

What other concerns do you have?

Legitimately curious.

<comment><USER4> What happens when Facebook closes the dummy, fake account you've associated with that device for not being a real person? Do all of the purchases you've made also get blocked?

<comment><USER3> I'd say you should get a refund at minimum. Or even transfer your purchases to a new account in some fashion.

<comment><USER5> That would never happen. More likely they would never reply or just give an automated answer.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> This generation of VR from Facebook (along with the launch of Facebook Horizon) is their first major move towards consolidating control over the next (perhaps final) communication medium, and burning in Facebook's assumptions to it. For example, they believe you ought to always be represented by your legal name, with a physical representation similar to the one you have in real life when communicating remotely through immersive computing. This can be seen being manifested by the slow steady changes to policies and terms. With this generation, Facebook will require a Facebook account, and thus a full chain back to a legal identity for you to communicate with others on their VR platform.

Over time they've slowly ratcheted up policies and behavior that are increasingly at odds with the desires of the early adopter enthusiast community. However, these have been done slowly so as to not kill the necessary participation in their ecosystem needed to bootstrap their wider VR platform plays.

These developments are deeply troubling and those worried about a future where human interaction is largely surveiled and behavior largely manipulated ought to be mindful before buying into Facebook's ecosystem.

I spoke extensively about the dangers here and now that it is coming to fruition it's even more important to understand the implications so consumers can choose wisely.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_5w8xbeCc2Q](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_5w8xbeCc2Q)

</comment><comment><USER7> They have removed the video teaser already but there is some more detail here :

Facebook's Oculus Quest 2 leaks in full via official promo videos A full launch of the headset is rumored for later this week

[https://www.theverge.com/platform/amp/2020/9/14/21435891/ocu...](https://www.theverge.com/platform/amp/2020/9/14/21435891/oculus- quest-2-leaked-promotional-video-specs-features-qualcomm-xr-2-platform-6gb- ram-4k-display)

<comment><USER8> So you can play wirelessly some stuff with onboard chip and storage?

Correct me if I am wrong, but it doesn't seem like you would be able to do much with that. Since VR is such a power hog - say 2x 2K display at at least 70frames with onbard chip?

<comment><USER9> I've had an Oculus Quest for the past ~15 months (essentially since it came out). It doesn't have the power for high-end PC levels of detail, but being able to just strap on the headset and start playing is delightful.

It works quite well with a variety of games, and the Quest 2 should boost the experience.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Mods: this is removed, "Content Unavailable"

</comment><comment><USER11> I miss being excited about VR tech. I used to run a CRT/Shutter glasses setup back in the day for racing games. Now that big tech has moved in, my interest in trying it again, has waned.

<comment><USER12> I share your sentiment. Back in the 1970s (when I was a kid) through the 1990s, getting a new piece of hi-tech gear was just plain fun.

Modern hardware is even more awesome, but it seems like almost every product that interests me is tarnished by manufacturers hell-bent on recurring revenue streams, or gathering as much of my personal information as possible to increase their profits.

I make a living as a software developer, but I'm coming to hate so much about modern technology. It reminds me of a line from the movie Sneakers [0], where some anonymous corporate programmer says to another, "Remember when computers used to be fun?" (Or something like that. I saw the movie 25 years ago.)

[0] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sneakers_(1992_film)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sneakers_\(1992_film\))

<comment><USER13> I dunno. Valve makes good VR gear, and they aren't in the business of selling personal information.

<comment><USER14> How does Valve's VR gear rank in user experience?

<comment><USER13> The advantage and disadvantage of Valve's VR is entirely that it is tethered to a PC (at least wirelessly if you have the wireless module) and the PC ecosystem. That means you can take advantage of your existing Steam investment, Steam sales, and interface.

The disadvantage is that maintaining a gaming PC seems daunting for some folks. Also, you have to figure out how to get cables from your PC to an empty space that is wired for VR. That can be a logistics problem if your gaming PC isn't near your living space.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Tying this to my non-existent facebook account means I won't even think about buying it. A headset that doesn't constantly feed my data to big tech would be fantastic.

Quest 1 is still going strong though (until our 2 year facebook-less amnesty runs up). Great piece of hardware. The biggest problem I see is that there's not been much adoption in terms of creating software from major software companies. I don't think the hardware is a limitation for the current gen. We could do so much more with vr than what we are doing right now.

<comment><USER16> I obviously agree and loathe the fact that Facebook is now tying the Quest to a FB account.

However I enjoy VR too much so I think I'll just bite the bullet and make a burner FB, covering my tracks as well as I can.

<comment><USER17> It's not like FB is the only one making VR headsets.

<comment><USER18> None are quite like the Quest, though. It's qualitatively different.

<comment><USER15> The main difference as far as I'm aware is that it's wireless and doesn't require a computer. It seems there are a few others have already hit the wireless mark. Not needing a computer is a big deal, but doesn't affect me personally (I only use it at home; I still want wireless though).

<comment><USER18> It's a pretty big difference. The issue is that you're basically going to need on-board computing in order to compensate for the lower bitrate of wirelessness, a problem that gets worse as the resolution increase. You need to do warping on the headset itself (as well as sophisticated compression) or you'll have motion sickness. So while it's possible to hack wirelessness on some of the other headsets currently, that becomes less and less feasible as resolution improves. Also, not requiring a computer is a bigger advantage than you might think. I also use my Quest only at home, but I'm able to use it anywhere in my house (wireless video direct to a headset without on-board computing uses 60GHz WiGig, and therefore is basically line-of-sight and very short distance only) and regardless of what the main computer is being used for. (Also, requiring a gaming PC for operations easily doubles the cost of the solution.) A separate wireless adapter (WiGig) on the PC also adds cost and is bulkier than the lower bandwidth Wifi connection you can use if you have on-board computing.

An example of how it's qualitatively different is I use it outside (at dusk). That's not really practical with other devices, and it's a completely different experience.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> The higher resolution would be really nice for reading and therefore for non- game applications.

If someone ever makes a retina-level (60 pixels per _degree_ ) display that's wireless like the Quest but as cheap as a nice monitor and comfortable to wear, then people may just use it in place of a multi-monitor setup. Particularly as the ecosystem evolves and it becomes easier to use mouse and keyboard in VR. (I think Quest just recently added support for tracking of a Bluetooth keyboard so you can see it in VR while you're typing on it.) $300-400 is roughly that price point, which is about where the current Quest is.

But even with the upped resolution of the Quest2 (which might bring the pixel density to 20 pixels per degree), we're still about a factor of 10 away from the retina-like clarity that you'd want for reading and doing work in VR. (The highest end VR headsets are about a factor of 5 away from that, in terms of numbers of pixels.)

By the way, it's interesting that we're pushing the limits of display bandwidths. Even with lossless compression, it's tough to shoot that many pixels smoothly even to a wired VR headset. We might need wireless headsets like the Quest if only to do some of the heavy-lifting, low-latency processing.

<comment><USER19> Pixels per inch do not make sense on a VR headset. The screens are tiny.

<comment><USER18> oops,sorry, i meant pixels per degree (altho per inch is related to bulkiness of the headset).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> A lot of people are going to be spending a lot of time indoors this winter, I think this will sell like hotcakes.

</comment><comment><USER21> I really like the friendly feel and the way she talked in this this leaked Oculus Quest 2 promo video.

Well made and not at all that pushy like many commercials can be. Informative and to-the-point.</comment>


Griveaux Paris race: Sex video prompts Macron ally to step down - <AUTHOR> https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-51502424 <comment><AUTHOR> I know the topic is a bit hot, but I think it shows again the danger of sharing private stuff (in the extreme in this case) online.

<comment><USER2> It looks like it was shared in a way that should have been deleted after viewing (Snapshat?), as the capture I had the displeasure to see showed a "this message will delete itself one minute after viewing". Not sure if someone took the pain to bypass a protection (which would say entrapment) or if it wzs shared over a very insecure platform.

Also, it is kinda ironic that the man at the source of the publication is a Russian political refugee, sworn Putin opponent. Not quite the expected foreign influence...</comment></comment>


DirecTV and Ice Cream - <AUTHOR> http://deliberateday.com/directv-and-ice-cream/

<comment><USER2> Although a sweet story, there's an underlying message here that's disappointing; this type of genuine kindness shouldn't be newsworthy.</comment>