In my career with VR (and to a lesser extent the moving target of
"cutting ege" graphics/vis tools) it was a constant experience that
using high-end interfaces which lower various thresholds to "the
suspension of disbelief", primed users to then experience lower-fidelity
(and cost) equipment/software with greater apprehension than those who
were only directly presented the lower fidelity.
I was never chartered nor allowed (for many good reasons) to try to do
anything like a formal study on this, but anecdotally it was very common
(IMO) to see scientists (and others interested in analyzing their
data/models) obtain a qualitatively new understanding of something upon
seeing in 3D what they had only been exposed to in 2D or with dynamics
vs statics, color vs BW, or high resolution/FOV vs low, etc. They
didn't always self-identify that they had experienced/apprehended
something new, but whether they continued to book time in a CAVE or
Immersive Workbench or PowerWall or ordered a Stereoscopic 3D
workstation (there was an era when all of the Weapons code teams were
given a 3D-stereoscopic workstation, and the graphics processing power
to feed them) they often (anecdotally) seemed to have new insights that
persisted with the lower-fidelity interfaces they returned to.
The most acute example *I* ever experienced was the first time I used
"pinch gloves" to simulate "grasping" a 3D-stereo-scopic-head-tracked
model floating above the Immersive Workbench which facilitated the
illusion. Even though all was tethered(glasses, gloves) and resolution
was low (~1K^2) the 3D object I had been looking at and manipulating on
a 2D surface display (perspective and motion/rotation parallax only)
almost literally "Jumped into my hand" when I first pressed my
index/thumb glove-patches together and the object's display-list matrix
became attached to my hand/wrist/fingers with the full illusion that I
had just grasped it and was moving it around, including releasing,
regrabbing, etc. I had done the same kind of manipulation with a mouse
by clicking buttons and dragging many times, as well as viewing it in
stereoscopic 3D, but the "haptic-immersive" addition moved the object
across the "self-other" boundary in obvious but extreme ways. Today's
consumer HMD/controller (e.g. Oculus) makes something *nearly* as good
for a few hundred bucks...
I am biased because I would claim that I *always* lower my threshold of
"disbelief" when presented with an added dimension or increased fidelity
in the coding of models/data. Even more importantly (and relevant to
this conversation), I have always had some persistent increase in
awareness that comes with it. This is not to say that jacking up specs
is always a good idea or "worth it", I've endured way too many
discussions and/or purchasing cycles where quantity was conflated with
quality in very dysfunctional ways.
My work with NREL over the last several years (concluded a year ago when
my colleague there jumped ship to IOHK/Cardano) spanned this pretty
effectively. They built a CAVE, a Powerwall (non-stereo) and had a 3D
workstation (stereoscopic with Spaceball interface) but the key to using
these effectively was to build software frameworks that made it
easy(ish) to bring their own favorite data and tools into those
environments as well as returning to their offices (and laptops) with
web-apps that allowed them to continue whatever work they did in the
more fully immersive environments in lower dimension/fidelity without
the gear. They were experimenting with various HMDs. In the final
project with them, I was doing remote collaboration experiments with
them on my Oculus Quest while they variously used their CAVE, 3D
workstation and their own HMDs (a variety).
I get the impression that the newer crop of gamers (mostly a generation
younger than Glen, but including my own age-peers) have been well
"sensitized" to lowering that threshold between the real and the
virtual. While many of them/you (Glen) may not have ever experienced
your data/models in those faux-reality environments, I highly recommend it.
This diatribe about high-fidelity/dimension to "sensitize" followed by
low-fi/dimension interface/equipment neglects to speak of the equally
valuable compelling experience of having someone(s) else experience the
same data/model alongside you. The suspension of disbelief that is
enhanced by group-experience is equally powerful (for better or worse).
I think this has implications for taking "guided tripping" to a new
level (nod to Dave's reference to VR sex, tripping, etc). I'll save
that rant/rave for another missive.
I also can't help but (re)gesture toward the Guintatas/Hubler work in
Interreality which addressed some of the practical as well as
philosophical issues of coupling a virtual and real systems in real-time.
- Steve
On 8/9/22 10:18 AM, glen wrote:
Yeah, it's a common trope amongst video game haters, too ... something
like the No True Scotsman fallacy. There was a thread on another forum
extolling John Cleese's (like many an old white man's crusty
mal-understanding of the world) suggestion that Wokeism is hurting
"comedy". Just because old white men can't distinguish fantasy from
reality doesn't mean kids can't. One of the more interesting things
about, say, speed running a video game is trying to do it with
different interfaces [⛧] ... similar to trying to brush your teeth
with your off hand. We (anyone with a still plastic brain) can learn a
"world" with one interface and translate that knowledge to a new
interface. But what's more fantastic, that I think Dave can abide, is
that one can also learn to swap out a multiplicity of "insides" while
holding both the interface and the "outside" constant.
So a full parameter sweep runs orthogonally across the 3 axes:
• fix the inside, fix the interface, vary the outside
• fix the inside, vary the interface, fix the outside
• fix the inside, vary the interface, vary the outside
• vary the inside, fix the interface, fix the outside
• vary the inside, fix the interface, vary the outside
• vary the inside, vary the interface, fix the outside
• vary the inside, vary the interface, vary the outside
Of course, part of the point is that inside-interface and
interface-outside aren't disjoint. I'm not sure I fully buy the
behaviorists' rhetoric that it's a *continuum*. There could easily be
a logical barrier in there somewhere, if only schematic. But attempts
at the orthogonal sweep should help us see where the cross terms
matter most.
[⛧] My black PS4 controller is terribly twitchy compared to my gold
one. I died like 5 times getting my latest Dark Souls twink started.
Pfft.
On 8/9/22 08:56, Marcus Daniels wrote:
For quadriplegics, there would be loose wires to find and retrain.
One could imagine learning to run again without any risk of falling,
and then swapping in the mechanized legs once training was done. A
simulator would need to capture rigid body physics, and terrain and
handle I/O with the nervous system such that the host would feel as
if they were standing, sitting, running, etc. even though it was
virtualized.
On Aug 8, 2022, at 6:38 PM, Prof David West <[email protected]>
wrote:
With VR your 'ordinary senses' are still functional and still
sending signals to the brain—hence "simulator sickness" when your
inner ears disagree with your eyes. Also, the fact that your brain
still has access to "normal" data, it tends to interpolate and
interpret the sensory data from the VR apparatus and the experience
is always a hybrid.
Some absolutely fascinating—but totally non-respectable—research was
done on virtual sex, including 'body suits' with paired sensors and
effectors, olfactory stimuli, and taste to augment the visual
inputs. Sex they got, but lust and arousal eluded them.
None of that conflict exists with hallucinogens.
It is a huge mistake to study hallucinogens with an exclusive brain
focus. Some of the most interesting work I say in Amsterdam involved
attempts to track the effects throughout the body. This would
suggest that even a direct silicon-neuron connection would still
fall short and the Matrix notion is not achievable.
davew
On Mon, Aug 8, 2022, at 8:30 AM, glen wrote:
Here's the SMMRY if anyone's troubled by a paywall:
https://smmry.com/https://www.technologyreview.com/2022/08/06/1056727/vr-virtual-reality-psychedelics-transcendence/#&SM_LENGTH=7
wrote:
She adds, "There's definitely differences between what a
psychedelic experience feels like and what virtual reality feels
like." Because of this, she appreciates that Isness-D charts a new
path to transcendence instead of just mimicking one that existed
already.
More research is needed on the enduring effects of an Isness-D
experience and whether virtual reality, in general, can induce
benefits similar to psychedelics.
The dominant theory on how psychedelics improve clinical outcomes
is that their effect is driven by both the subjective experience
of a trip and the drug's neurochemical effect on the brain.
VR is better at inducing awe than regular video, so Isness-D might
similarly dial it down.
The startup sells a shortened version of Isness-D to companies for
virtual wellness retreats, and provides a similar experience
called Ripple to help patients, their families, and their
caregivers cope with terminal illness.
A coauthor of the paper describing Isness-D is even piloting it in
couples and family therapy.
For one phase of my Isness-D experience, moving created a brief
electric trail that marked where I'd just been.
I've been tempted by Steam's device:
https://store.steampowered.com/vrhardware/. But it hasn't been a
priority.
On 8/8/22 07:05, Roger Critchlow wrote:
https://arxiv.org/abs/2002.00940 <https://arxiv.org/abs/2002.00940>
This must be on some topic around here.
Originally picked up from
https://www.technologyreview.com/2022/08/06/1056727/vr-virtual-reality-psychedelics-transcendence/
<https://www.technologyreview.com/2022/08/06/1056727/vr-virtual-reality-psychedelics-transcendence/>,
which is paywalled.
The original arxiv posting is 20 years old, but the work was just
published inh
CHI 2020: Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors
in Computing Systems
-. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom
https://bit.ly/virtualfriam
to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
archives: 5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/
1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
