this post was submitted on 10 May 2024
19 points (70.2% liked)

Technology

63313 readers
4621 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
19
Did Stanford just prototype the future of AR glasses? (www.theverge.com)
submitted 9 months ago by solo@kbin.earth to c/technology@lemmy.world
16 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

A research team at Stanford is developing a new AI-assisted holographic imaging technology it claims is thinner, lighter, and higher quality than anything its researchers have seen.

the Stanford tech is currently just a prototype

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] just_another_person@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago (2 children)

They already exist in much larger packaging.

[–] woelkchen@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

They already exist in much larger packaging.

Nobody uses that stuff, though.

[–] just_another_person@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago

Sure they do. Hololens is used by a large swath of major engineering firms, I've seen people use the Quests fairly extensively for AR, and Apple somehow still sold out their pretty awful AR product as well.

[–] RainfallSonata@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Of course they exist.

[–] just_another_person@lemmy.world 5 points 9 months ago (2 children)

So they already "happened".

[–] technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 9 months ago

I think most people understand the difference between "existing" and "happening".

That was the whole point of the original comment.

[–] RainfallSonata@lemmy.world -5 points 9 months ago (1 children)

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

[–] just_another_person@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago

Seems you used that word. I'm just responding to your comments.