Obvious Engine: a vision-based augmented reality engine for indie games  - <AUTHOR> http://obviousengine.com/

<comment><USER2> This is really cool, but im not sure - how is it supposed to be used in games? Reality cant possibly be a better playground than specifically tailored VR.

I always saw AR as a convenient way to provide additional data on surroundings. Point out landmarks using a HUD in a car. A nice way to present information on a product (like an artificial "the company making this product supports SOPA" sticker :) ).

But I am really at a loss as to how this would be used in games. Virtual Pets maybe? but whats the fun of having to look at it through a 4 inch screen ? Hell, even his dancing foxes (or whatever they are) dont fit in tht ipad screen. The user sees the space right next to the ipad window, where they should be. And there's nothing there. Thats a huge immersion killer to me. Its not the same as with VR, as VR doesnt have to pretend the illusion is actually right behind the screen window. AR with full goggles ought to make up for that - but the hardware isnt nearly there yet.

This _is_ technologically very impressive - but what can we really make of it?

<comment><USER3> I dunno. I forsee a pokemon game with creatures you have to look for to find, that can be accurately hiding behind/near/in things at various times of the day.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Now implement a raytracer that infers lighting location and reflectance (and subsurface scattering) of the objects in the scene from the image and then we can have a whole new level of realism.

In all seriousness, though, I do wonder what kind of processing power you would need in a handheld device to be able to do that. Could we realistically achieve it within 15-20 years? It's certainly one of those "gimmicks" with extreme potential.

That little tangent about realism aside, the engine itself does look quite remarkable in how smooth it is able to run. I wonder hwo well it handles occlusion, changes in lighting and the other benchmarks for computer vision, as it was not demonstrated at all in the video. In fact, the presenter quite handily avoided putting his hand between the camera and the soda can.

Other than that, I can't say much without trying the thing, but I do not own an iOS device and don't plan to in the near future. If someone decides to try out the framework, I'd be glad to read a more detailed analysis of it.

<comment><USER5> _we can have a whole new level of realism._

What would you be able to do that you can't do now?

<comment><USER4> As Geee stated, it's about imitating the lighting of the scene. There's all sorts of subtle and not-so-subtle effects that come as a result of light bouncing around.

While it may be obvious when a virtual object is missing a shadow (as in the demonstration video), even implementing that would not be enough to fool the human brain completely, though it isn't always obvious what the problem is, only a subconscious nagging.

If you're interested in what precisely the effects that the real world has and augmented reality generally doesn't have - i'd say the biggest ones are shadows (including soft shadows [0]), depth of field [1], ambient occlusion [2], and indirect lighting.

You don't necessarily have to write a full-blown raytracer with global illuminasion, casting billions of rays to get a passable result. All of the above mentioned things can more or less be approximated in some way, and most modern game engines do so (I don't know of any phone games that do, mind, as the calculations are still non-trivial, but I do remember an interesting tech demo from Nvidia).

The biggest problem, though, is that we can do these things in a controlled setting, where you know the exact shape, texture and light reflective properties on every object in the scene. As you can imagine, that is not so in the case of augmented reality (as I quipped in my earlier post, you would have to infer surface reflectance from the image in some way). Compared to the problem of global illumination in a virtual scene - well, let's just say it's orders of magnitude harder. I don't recall anyone actually having scanned a scene with a single camera. And that's an AI breakthrough that indeed people would talk about.

[0] : <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soft_shadows> [1] : <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depth_of_field> [2] : <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ambient_occlusion> [*} : Also, google images

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Feature tracking on an object which stands out clearly against the background? Using morphing filters on the segmented object? Not that innovative.

Now I do like the particle trick. You see this in some video games to highlight objects of interest (e.g. World of Warcraft). It makes it much easier for players to locate them and zero in on them against background clutter. Probably useful for AR if you have a good application case.

However, the potential is heavily constrained until you get displays capable of "non-interfering annotation" - which is to say, you need a good HMD and not a phone. Not that you can go out and buy "a good HMD" by this measure, but that's a big thorny mess out to the side of the software concerns.

</comment><comment><USER7> Games? Imagine Google giving away augmented reality glasses (let's call them Googgles) that help you find your way in the environment by allowing you to do a local search ('where are my car keys?'), by adding name tags to people you have seen before but do not know well, etc.

Now, that giving away comes at a price. Frequently, when a Dr. Pepper can enters your visual field, that can becomes an animated advert. Your glasses will know how to time those adverts so that they stay (just) below the nuisance point, because they will have read your gmail and that of your friends, and will know what you ate.

</comment><comment><USER8> How fun would it be if you could program it with facial recognition and replace con attendants with their fursonas? :D

</comment><comment><USER9> Quite nice! Kudos for what appears to be a significant setup for Augmented Reality.</comment>


BarCampBlock in Palo Alto - this weekend - anyone attending? - <AUTHOR> http://barcamp.org/BarCampBlock

<comment><USER2> I'm planning to attend at least Saturday, assuming nothing else comes up. I'll be the one in the Virtualmin T-shirt (then again, I've sent out a bunch of them, so I suppose it isn't impossible for someone else to be wearing one...). Y'all be sure to say "hi" if you see me.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> I just found out about this a few minutes ago. I'd kinda like to go but it's rather late notice, I already had plans for this weekend. Are any of you going?

</comment><comment><USER3> It looks interesting, but what happens there exactly?

<comment><USER4> I could be wrong but I think it's just a venue for programmers (most likely entrepreneurial ones) to get together and build something cool (possible during the course of just that weekend)

<comment><USER2> It's an "unconference" where everyone presents, everyone watches, and lots of socializing goes on. It's not about building things, though I imagine it's hard to resist building something if you meet up with folks or ideas that set you aflame with enthusiasm.

Imagine a developers conference without suits setting it up or major booths from people who want to sell you stuff. I doubt this one will be free of suits or people hocking there wares, as it is so large...but it should still be fun and predominantly free of entreprisey conference trappings.

Of course, to cover the other side, imagine a conference in which no one decides who presents--anybody who wants to write their name on the board can present something, no matter how stupid. You will see numerous boring, poorly planned and poorly presented, talks. You can walk away, however, and not feel bad about wasting any money because it is all free.

All around, a good time.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I can't make it Sat, but I'm going on Sunday</comment>


Toughest developer puzzle ever - <AUTHOR> http://toughestdeveloperpuzzleever.com/tdpe2/

<comment><USER2> The transition from 5 to 6 requires a password. The clues are ample and the answer quite certain, but the redirect link the 'successful' password gives is broken.

Anyone know if that's intentional?

And yes, I have 1000 other things I need to do.</comment>


No Appearance of Impropriety - <AUTHOR> http://micheleincalifornia.blogspot.com/2017/07/no-appearance-of-impropriety.html <comment><USER2> Stories like this make me glad to live in Germany. Things are by no means perfect, we have the same cases of sexism, harrasment and scandals as everybody else. But it would never occur to me that it is inappropriate to be alone with a female colleague at work. When this topic came up at a mixed American/German lunch round at work (in the US), and someone said you shouldn't close the door if a woman and a man are alone in an office, the Germans literally did a spit take.

In fact, not treating women exactly like your male colleages would be considered backwards and offensive by many women, rather than considerate or appropriate.

But it also works the other way around. If you think something is inappropriate when women are around, then it is inapproprate, period. What I mean is this kind of old boys attitude / bro jokes / casual sexism. This is actually a pretty endemic problem here (they speak of Altherrenwitze = old men's jokes), but at least it is considered inappropriate nowadays. But that is about the maximal extent of "inappropriateness". To see something wrong in sharing a car or having lunch alone with a member of the opposite sex reminds most people here of Saudi Arabia, I would say.

<comment><USER3> _Things are by no means perfect, we have the same cases of sexism, harrasment and scandals as everybody else. But it would never occur to me that it is inappropriate to be alone with a female colleague at work._

How believable would a claim of sexual harassment be if everyone you asked said, "I have never known him to be behind a closed door with any woman but his wife"? I mean, that's the point of the article, right? Folks spun all kinds of rumors about the first century Christians. Peter admonished them to live such that anyone hearing those rumors would laugh them off as ridiculous. Ever wonder why Billy Graham was never caught in some sex scandal while his peers all around him were? He was never alone in a room with a woman other than his wife. (And, without personally knowing the man, it probably helped if he never had sex with anyone but his wife as well.)

You acknowledge the same scandals as in the U. S., and yet I don't understand how it's all weird and shit, like "Saudi Arabia". Estimate for yourself how many of those cases wouldn't exist had the parties involved gave not even the appearance of impropriety. Let's say, hypothetically, one party accuses the other of sexual harassment. And, because we've been temporarily granted psychic powers, we know the accused didn't do anything of the sort. Well, if there have been a lot of closed-door meetings and one-on-one sessions at the bar, some people are going to believe the rumors.

And it's not just sex. I've known a number of church pastors over the years, and to a man and woman they'll tell you they never touch the church money. Easy to shoot down rumors of dipping out of the collection plate if no one can say they've ever seen they pastor touch a single dollar bill. Of those that do count the money, I've always seen two people in the room. It squelches rumors, and probably most importantly, removes the temptation. Whereas I've been reading a surprising number of stories over the past year of children's soccer/football and baseball leagues losing tens of thousands from unaccountable team treasurers embezzling the funds.

Some people are going to believe the rumor regardless, that's just the way they roll. Others will need a little convincing. My advice is not to give them any more ammo than necessary.

<comment><USER2> I guess people here are less afraid of false accusations, and more of 1) actual wrongdoing, and 2) creating wierd rules that they feel are sexist or anachronistic.

Just to insure myself against potential false allegations of affairs or harrasment doesn't seem to be reason enough to advise that kind of segregation. Also its a slippery slope: it may start as a precaution, but if widespread, it becomes semi-mandatory.

The comparison with Saudi Arabia is hyperbolic of course, but I think not too far fetched. Everywhere where men and women are segregated, the stated motivation is not misogyny, but to protect women, and some kind of decency. It only ever looks wrong from the outside.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I used to work for a company that sells investment advice. The company has practices and tools in place to ensure that employees do not engage in insider trading. However, in addition to not allowing that to happen (because it's illegal, duh), the company aimed for this same standard - not even an appearance of impropriety.

I too thought of this concept during the recent scandals. It's why some people are suggesting no one-on-one meetings ever between a man and a woman who are engaged (or potentially engaged) in a power relation like investment or employment. I don't know enough about this world to say whether that will hinder women entrepreneurs' progress, or how it could be done to avoid that, but I think this concept is important.

And for whatever it's worth, if I end up walking behind or near a woman, in many cases but particularly at night, I will cross the street for the same reason.

</comment><comment><USER5> This kind of thing makes me think that remote work must be the future. Have everything in writing, interact when necessary for business, do the work, and avoid common everyday interactions and meals with people. The current popular belief is that forcing everyone to smell the fish that someone just microwaved will help their companies prosper, but all this negative energy over casual contact seems to indicate that operating a company in a way that is socially sanitary may be more helpful and less likely to generate liabilities than operating as a kind of social pressure cooker and reactor.

<comment><USER6> Face to face interactions can build stronger working relationships. I'd be slow to discount the importance of working directly with your co-workers.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Mz is on a roll recently. Can't say I'm complaining.</comment>


Bootstrap... http://yourstory.com/2014/04/bootstrap-entrepreneur-thumb-rules/ - <AUTHOR>

A. Bootstrap till you are bankrupt.
B. Use open source to solve your problems.
C. Don't follow the herd.
D. Democratize enterprise problems. E. Never hesitate to sneak inside startup conferences. G. Sell whatever you have.
I. Attract premium school talent
J. Do not clutter your organization with hierarchy. K. Pay your employees for performance; not for loyalty.
L. Don't hesitate to ask reputed industry seniors to consider an advisory or formal role.
M. Always look for partnerships, even with competitors. N. Become a member of industry associations and try to attend their meetings. O. Network, Network, Network.
P. Develop a very thick skin
Q. Always have your heart in the right place.
R. Own the defeats all alone.
S. Be always on the move if there's a scope for getting leads.
T. Travel cheap. Stay low cost.
U. Sell the product and the vision to your family first
V. Talk only with people who appreciate the risk that you are taking in terms of your time and career.
W. Avoid gossip like the plague it is.
X.  Always work in black and white.
Y. Be upfront. Straight talk always clears the air.
Z. Lastly, remember that innovation is not only about the product. It's applicable to everything we do <comment><AUTHOR> [http://yourstory.com/2014/04/bootstrap-entrepreneur-thumb- ru...](http://yourstory.com/2014/04/bootstrap-entrepreneur-thumb-rules/)</comment>


How the Ancient Maya Adapted to Climate Change - <AUTHOR> https://www.citylab.com/environment/2019/05/climate-change-ancient-maya-drought-irrigation/589816/ <comment><USER2> Blogspam of

[https://theconversation.com/misreading-the-story-of- climate-...](https://theconversation.com/misreading-the-story-of-climate- change-and-the-maya-113829)</comment>


A Federal Privacy Board Is Reviewing DHS' Airport Facial Recognition Programs - <AUTHOR> https://www.nextgov.com/emerging-tech/2019/10/federal-privacy-board-reviewing-dhs-airport-facial-recognition-programs/160341/ <comment><USER2> The data will be leaked. It's a matter of time. Not if, its when. History has already proved this will happen. I will deny and reject facial recognition, or biometric data requests.

<comment><AUTHOR> In addition, it's for sale to entities which are not lawfully entitled to such data.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Biometrics is just a chip that you can't remove from under your skin</comment>


Show HN: MelodyScript, a DSL for writing melodies with chords - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/pdorrell/melody_scripter <comment><USER2> Cool. It looks like the 4th bar of Yankee Doodle is missing a beat though: "| [C] c2 [G7] b |"

<comment><AUTHOR> It is correct as is, but ...

I realise that I haven't properly documented the rule that applies for note lengths, which is that the first note in the song and in each bar default to 1 beat, and all other notes default to the length of the previous note.

Also, if you write a song and the note lengths in a bar don't add up to the correct bar length, then Melody Scripter will give you a parse error.</comment></comment>


CTE doctor Bennet Omalu has profited selling distorted science? - <AUTHOR> https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2020/sports/cte-bennet-omalu/ <comment><AUTHOR> This article is an obvious hit piece, but some people versed in the science seem to agree with it.

What's the truth, here?</comment>


Study: Breastfeeding for 6 Months Is an Unrealistic Goal - <AUTHOR> http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2012/03/breastfeeding-for-6-months-is-an-unrealistic-goal/254507/

<comment><USER2> Hospital births are a big reason why breastfeeding fails. There's a narrow window of time between birth and establishing a breastfeeding relationship... Wait too long and the breast milk dries up.

My sister-in-law recently had a scheduled C-section and she suffered from complications (infections, panic attacks, etc.) that left her in bad sorts for about two months. In a case like that there's no chance you can get breastfeeding started.

We had our son at home and he never left my wife's side for the first week and she had no real difficulty continuing a breastfeeding relationship past one year.</comment>