Submitted by Shelfrock77 t3_109n7y8 in singularity
Comments
Shelfrock77 OP t1_j3zko2s wrote
As Klauss Schwabb says it, a technolcigal revolution is underway “that is blurring the lines between the physical, digital, and biological spheres.”.
AllCommiesRFascists t1_j43jorc wrote
I love how much seethe that man generates from conspiracy dumbasses
jehehegjeieiueg t1_j3zok6v wrote
Can you tell me more fancy words that I can use for my academicians? Edit : It’s not about technological word, the quote could make me pass those secret quality check points that the university follows, you know.. The professors have those orders from the quality control teams saying in this class only 2 students are qualified to get HD or A grade, doesn’t matter how much fantastic work you think you put, there are quality control people who make sure only some classes with certain criteria could gather certain grades for a certain number of students, say the subject is about mathematics and most students are doing bachelor of some accounting or finance. Then for some reason the whole average marks will increase because quality control teams think that those (good at math) students will cooperate with the others. Say most of the students have nothing to do with math, then surely they are all getting less than B.
Source : I worked very hard only to get B mark after a grade appeal, then I had to do some consulting to know more about those money making machines called universities.
below-the-rnbw t1_j4015kq wrote
If those are fancy words to you, I got some bad news..
Willing-Love472 t1_j409wmx wrote
Technolcigal sounds fancy.
w-alien t1_j401qwb wrote
The Industrial Revolution took a century. We are moving so much faster
PubliusMaximusCaesar t1_j41us72 wrote
Beginning of the internet age comes close.
JVM_ t1_j42dv4k wrote
December 2022 to today has been insane.
Insane doesn't cover it. Neither does mind-blowing....
AI, I need a new word for your progress...
pab_guy t1_j42f8p0 wrote
Over in futurology they are lamenting the death of innovation today LOL
cy13erpunk t1_j43m65f wrote
this is what exponential growth looks like
afawk aside from the theory of previously advanced civilizations that then disappeared , we have never been advancing as fast as we are today
and tomorrow that same statement will continue to be true , ad infinitum
overlordpotatoe t1_j3zsq6t wrote
VR will be so cool if they can reduce it down to a pair of lightweight glasses/goggles and have full body tracking without the need for controllers. It's probably not even that far off being possible.
NotASuicidalRobot t1_j3zw0f9 wrote
There are VR headsets that solely use it's onboard front cameras for tracking, though they still need controllers. Imagine if it directly tracked the hands ... Actually it can't be that hard right
overlordpotatoe t1_j3zwj14 wrote
The VR headset I have can already use hand tracking for controls, though it's not perfect.
NotASuicidalRobot t1_j3zwleg wrote
Aight that's kinda cool. So yeah this but better and smaller
overlordpotatoe t1_j3zybcr wrote
Yeah. Getting the headsets compact enough to be less of a nuisance might actually be the part we're furthest away from. They're getting lighter with each generation, but they're still fundamentally pretty bulky headsets.
NotASuicidalRobot t1_j3zysva wrote
True yeah
XoxoForKing t1_j41xex5 wrote
I imagine a possible way that we might get body tracking without controllers could be by using bone conductivity, like the earphones but analyzing the return echo
clearlylacking t1_j428c6t wrote
What a neat idea! Do they already do this in the medical field for something?
XoxoForKing t1_j42cx7g wrote
I don't really know if there are medical uses in regards to bone conductivity, but the echo is used commonly for the ultrasounds - the question is whether current technologies would be able to make a wider analysis with the correct setup
[deleted] t1_j425ofz wrote
[deleted]
Lyb0n t1_j3zvtin wrote
so all it does is sense the interference? can this map every object in a room with enough complexity? this is the perfect way to track motion without cameras and suits what the fuck
ElvisArcher t1_j412n8f wrote
It likely gets a baseline reading of immobile objects first, then removes that as a background "noise" layer, leaving you with "mobile" things. It makes me wonder how it would identify an oscillating fan, or a Roomba. Or, if a person stood still enough for long enough, would it become "invisible"?
ML4Bratwurst t1_j4063vd wrote
As badass as this technology is, I am pretty scared about it. That's opening so many doors for surveillance
_ChestHair_ t1_j408s10 wrote
Unless someone is surveilling you in particular, I doubt this provides much useful data that can't already be gathered from tracking your phone usage
ML4Bratwurst t1_j40rhcl wrote
Well you can just not use your phone and you would be safe. With this technology (maybe more advanced one) you can not escape it
Hvarfa-Bragi t1_j41662c wrote
That ship sailed a while ago, bud. Special forces and swat have had this tech for a while.
cea1990 t1_j41g9nd wrote
Hardly the same thing. That requires someone to be on the other side of a wall. This development would potentially allow anyone to weaponize any Wi-Fi antenna for surveillance.
Hvarfa-Bragi t1_j41h3zk wrote
It's exactly the same thing, physically. It's just that in this case your subjects have brought the transceiver inside for you.
cea1990 t1_j430a0i wrote
So what are you arguing? That because SOF/SWAT uses a local tool in specifically targeted scenario, I should not be concerned about this new technology that democratizes remote surveillance in a way never before seen?
lvvy t1_j41hkru wrote
Special forces can just deliver radar by drone, you won't notice.
bemmu t1_j40a330 wrote
When we have near-human level deep learning models for things humans can do, what does this level of performance look like when applied to things we can’t do at all?
JVM_ t1_j42esqj wrote
I mean, you can't blend as fast as the blender in your kitchen. You can do the same motion and number of repetitions, but the machine is much better than you at it.
I think we're at the same step in the industrial/data revolution.
Humans CAN do things, but AI can do them much quicker and faster.
A blender still needs human input, and a human to decide what and when to blend something.
A blender or Roomba wasn't envisioned when electric appliances started to be invented, maybe the world will be a better place with AI tools that we can't envision yet? Here's hoping.
---
AI assisted chemistry so that we can refine oil out of the atmosphere?
AI modified plants/photosynthesis to create oil/sugars/plastic out of the atmosphere?
We already have AI that can model proteins folding sequences, and protein language is just another thing for the language models to learn. Here's hoping for a better world.
Shelfrock77 OP t1_j3za4io wrote
Every city camera in the world is doing this all day zoomed in. Imagine how much data we will have.
SpecialMembership t1_j3zl7mb wrote
Great news is wifi jammers are available.
Timetraveler01110101 t1_j40y3gk wrote
They’ve had this for years if they are showing us now.
Terrible-Pattern-124 t1_j404g91 wrote
Damn that’s dope
Clevererer t1_j3zrqsq wrote
What do the receiving antennas look like and are they directional?
_Porb t1_j3zx0yv wrote
https://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.118.183901
You need two for this one from 2017, I assume the more.yiu have the higher fidelity
mafian911 t1_j3zx7vd wrote
I believe you can get this kind of tracking in the same room as the router. Perhaps thankfully, I doubt you can get anywhere close to this level of precision if it's in another room.
Still, I bet you can probably at least determine presence and direction through a wall. The signal is designed to penetrate.
ElvisArcher t1_j413f0g wrote
If implemented for consumer VR, there will likely be a dedicated "base station" putting out a clean signal in the room you are using for VR. It might not even be an actual Wi-Fi carrier signal ... i get the impression they were experimenting with "off-the-shelf" wavelength bands to see if the technology was feasible.
I would expect a consumer version of this to use a non-interfering frequency that was close enough to the Wi-Fi range that they wouldn't have problems with licensing with the FCC. Or maybe even use an ACTUAL Wi-Fi band ... and then let the installing user decide which channel that is (one that wouldn't interfere with their existing wi-fi).
pab_guy t1_j42fnj4 wrote
This is just the authors showing off technical chops. I don't see this being commercialized as we have easier ways, with cameras, to accomplish the same thing.
musicofspheres1 t1_j41z8ml wrote
For our consumerist convenience of course
[deleted] t1_j3zr92b wrote
[deleted]
ElvisArcher t1_j4128ah wrote
That is ... amazing.
DinnerTraditional599 t1_j421hl5 wrote
its amazing
VRrob t1_j428uuj wrote
Oops, just discovered tech the military has had for decades.
unjustaccusation t1_j43ry0d wrote
So Dark Knight. Got it.
relevantusername2020 t1_j43u4up wrote
holy shit i was half jokingly suggesting this not that long ago but i didnt think it was possible - especially not that accurate
Smellz_Of_Elderberry t1_j441f0g wrote
I had a friend tell me about this several years ago, I thought he was bullshitting. This means that whoever can literally get a visual image of your home at all times.. that's terrifying.
Lewis0981 t1_j3zzjo7 wrote
Anyone know if they can do the same with a 5G signal?
Competitive-Finding7 t1_j40hznu wrote
This is so old tech. Batman did this years ago!
pab_guy t1_j42fxwb wrote
To be fair this basic idea was done years ago...
[deleted] t1_j416dns wrote
[deleted]
GOU_NoMoreMrNiceGuy t1_j40oskz wrote
perfect for vfx, espionage and peeping in on your hot neighbor when her boyfriend comes over.
lutel t1_j40ednz wrote
This is fake. You won't be able to achieve such resolution due to WiFi wave length. Looks like scam for getting some investors money.
Hvarfa-Bragi t1_j416j6d wrote
They're not directly imaging the human bodies in high res; they are getting blobs of movement and fitting a model of a human body onto it.
lutel t1_j417u76 wrote
It doesn't look like it by looking at demo. It is way too detailed that would be physically possible.
Hvarfa-Bragi t1_j418ses wrote
You're not seeing the raw data, you're just seeing the resulting fitted model.
That model isn't showing the data underlying it, OP sucks a little.
It's like if I took a 3d textured model of something and stretched it over a kid's crayon drawing - the model here is much more detailed than the data that informs it, but all it's using is the positions.
lutel t1_j419faf wrote
I got it but you can't make up by example hand movements with the wavelength of 5 cm, demo looks way too good to be real imo
Hvarfa-Bragi t1_j41av1i wrote
It would depend on the distance from the transceiver and the analysis.
Even with larger resolutions (poorer) you can use parallax and time distortion (movement and repeated sensings) to get better resolved.
I didn't see any finger positioning, but algorithms could easily infer the position of hands via inverse kinematics and position the maquette accordingly.
It would be helpful of OP to show the raw data visualization underneath.
No_Persimmon_5587 t1_j3zii1n wrote
I don't think there has been a time in history where technology has advanced more quickly than it's doing now.
Maybe the industrial revolutions.