> AR doesn't significantly augment your experience of riding the bus to work, ordering dinner at a restaurant, taking a walk around the block, or even most forms of labor (manual or otherwise).
I think AR could have a very significant impact in all situations where it's hard to succinctly convey the entirety of what's going on and people tend to say, "you need to be here to see it."
If one could localize a dozen Google Glass like devices within a 3D model of a locale of interest, like a construction site or the site of a large public news event, then the various POV of the cameras could be represented within the 3D space. This would allow viewers to place the various POV in context. Zooming around the space then into the POV of a reporter onsite would really make such locations concrete for viewers in the way beyond what a shot with buildings in the background and a crowd in the foreground could not.
I also think that AR could be used to allow a team of human experts and assistants to augment an agent, negotiator, or executive at an event or meeting, much as one sees lawyers whispering into the ears of executives and politicians. This would have the advantage of not having the whispering expert be visible. It would allow executives and politicians to project a more competent image. (The current Google Glass could not suffice for this, as it is still too obtrusive.) The same 3D virtual space could also be used to aggregate and contextualize the situation for the remote experts. It's also easy to see how aggregating various POV from security guards and bodyguards would give a much clearer picture of the security situation around a VIP.
tl;dr - I agree that devices like Google Glass have the most value integrated into teams of people who are dealing with the integration of disparate information in complex situations.
You can do a lot with that, but you could do a lot more with the AR/VR setup I've described. The assistants could see the body language of participants and take that information into account when formulating advice. (In fact, assistants could flip between multiple POV and gauge the body language of a sampling of the crowd or all of the key players.) If an assistant has a piece of side knowledge, like they happen to know on sight that someone's brooch was made by a famous craftsman, they could provide that as a conversation starter and help the executive score points. If an important person is walking up from behind, the executive could be alerted to end the conversation and so she can present her argument first.
As often noted around here, one can do more with more data. The AR/VR combination I've described would provide that additional data.
This discussion is about what Google actually delivered, not about what they implicitly over-promised it would be like in their blue-sky feel-good demo videos, by referring to unrealistic sci-fi special effects from blockbuster Hollywood movies that everyone has seen.
> This discussion is about what Google actually delivered
So you say. I was taking the conversation in a related direction. Somehow the idea that we can't talk about technological potential seems a bit out of place, even irrational for HN.
>"It would allow executives and politicians to project a more competent image."
By now, everyone is far too aware it's all about PROJECTING and IMAGE (and not into the user's eye about their environment, but into the audience's mind about the user), and at this point it's widely agreed that the image it projects is that of a Narcissistic Douchebag Glasshole.
> at this point it's widely agreed that the image it projects is that of a Narcissistic Douchebag Glasshole.
If you read the comments carefully, you will realize that I explicitly stated that the current devices would be too obtrusive for this purpose. It is possible that there would be a negative backlash over the use of such a device, but it would not be caused by the appearance of the device, if properly executed.
I think AR could have a very significant impact in all situations where it's hard to succinctly convey the entirety of what's going on and people tend to say, "you need to be here to see it."
If one could localize a dozen Google Glass like devices within a 3D model of a locale of interest, like a construction site or the site of a large public news event, then the various POV of the cameras could be represented within the 3D space. This would allow viewers to place the various POV in context. Zooming around the space then into the POV of a reporter onsite would really make such locations concrete for viewers in the way beyond what a shot with buildings in the background and a crowd in the foreground could not.
I also think that AR could be used to allow a team of human experts and assistants to augment an agent, negotiator, or executive at an event or meeting, much as one sees lawyers whispering into the ears of executives and politicians. This would have the advantage of not having the whispering expert be visible. It would allow executives and politicians to project a more competent image. (The current Google Glass could not suffice for this, as it is still too obtrusive.) The same 3D virtual space could also be used to aggregate and contextualize the situation for the remote experts. It's also easy to see how aggregating various POV from security guards and bodyguards would give a much clearer picture of the security situation around a VIP.
tl;dr - I agree that devices like Google Glass have the most value integrated into teams of people who are dealing with the integration of disparate information in complex situations.