See my self-correction. Turns out you were more correct than I gave you credit for initially. My apologies.
Self-correction: turns out you're right. Having read through my own link now, I hadn't realized that they licensed the brown box to Magnavox and that it later got turned into the Odyssey. Learn something new every day.
No, Odyssey was a different device that came later. I'm talking about The Brown Box.
Soylent News seems to be worth watching and checking in on occasionally, since it's slowly getting better and better comments (and they have folks actively developing and enhancing the back-end too), but yeah, it's nowhere near the level of commenting we get here.
So? Pong wasn't the first video game either. Pong didn't make it into homes until 1975, but by then home gaming consoles had been around for nearly a decade. See: the brown box.
The point is, prior to now, we've had stuff called "VR" that we'll look back on decades from now and will refer to as a "precursor to VR". We're one year into what history will consider true VR. Likewise, Pong may not have been the first, but it ushered in the modern era of video gaming, in much the same way that Oculus ushered in the modern era of VR. Pong was just the start though, and where things end up, none of us know.
I think, if we can just be patient and take the time to learn a bit more about each other, we can—quite possibly—finally get along with one another. No more fighting. No more squabbling. No more arguing about who or what is better. We learn to coexist.
Ya know, I think we may be on to something here. Before we lose this moment, let's just jot down those thoughts quickly...in emacs.
You do realize that your argument suggesting the current stuff isn't worthy of being called VR and that the old stuff was plain "AWFUL" is just proving his thesis that VR is still in its infancy and that we still don't know what the hell we're doing with it, right?
In my case, I get diet drinks with my meals, not because I'm trying to cut calories (even though I could stand to lose some more weight), but because my dentist gave me the choice between either cutting regular sodas or having to use prescription mouthwash and toothpaste on an everyday basis, on account of my genes blessing me with thin tooth enamel. Given that choice, I went for the diet drinks.
Which is to say, I agree, it's a bit silly when people think that choosing a diet drink will make up for the thousands of calories they're otherwise stuffing down their throats, but not all of us are doing it for that reason. Maybe keep that in mind before making assumptions.
You seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding with regards to what ResearchKit is about. It's not HealthKit, which is aimed at helping people to be healthier. It's ResearchKit, which is aimed at connecting medical researchers with voluntary subjects who are willing to submit anonymous data. As it is right now, researchers seeking data on how well a treatment affects a disease need to first seek out people with that disease, then they need to either bring those subjects into a doctor's office to be tested, which is typically done on an infrequent basis, or they need to rely on self-reporting out in the field. There are numerous flaws in those methodologies, leading to all sorts of lies, omissions, and other forms of error creeping in. And that's the best we've had to rely on up until now. Plus, response rates are ridiculously low since there's no great way to put researchers in touch with potential subjects, and even when potential subjects are aware of the research, most don't want to deal with the hassle.
By increasing awareness, taking the hassle out of it, and even promising to open source ResearchKit, Apple is providing a foundation on which researchers can finally address those issues. They're putting the diagnostic tools directly into our smart devices, and are doing so across any platform, thus allowing the researchers to get frequently-collected data from subjects under actual conditions, rather than having to rely on faulty self-reporting or infrequent lab visits. They can also get a much wider swath of data, allowing them to have more certainty about their results, along with a better understanding of what "normal" looks like. Even if a hypochondriac is using an app that relies on ResearchKit, it's a win for all of us, since it helps to establish more baseline readings from which we can better understand how our bodies are supposed to be behaving when we're in the real world, rather than in a lab. Moreover, it may eventually help to establish a baseline reading for them, which could then be used to show them that their readings are in line with where they were before when we knew they were well.
All of which is to say, this has nothing at all to do with people fretting about being sick, and has everything to do with helping research doctors better understand diseases and how the treatments they are providing address them. Joke about it if you want, but it sounds like a worthy goal to me.
Well, yes, really. The reason these claims are showing up right now is because he thinks he's finally cracked exactly that issue. The transplant is intended as a means to test that theory. And he can't do it on typical patients suffering from severed spinal cords due to trauma of some sort, since his idea relies on a very particular way of cutting the spinal cord, apparently.
Because we're not in the habit of wanton experimentation that might kill all of the patients involved. That's why we wait for there to be a case where they're going to die anyway. That way, no matter what happens, doctors have not violated their first oath to do no harm. Worst case, the person dies, just as they would have otherwise.
To each their own. Or, in this case, to each the other.
At least a million people.
At least. The articles the other day all misreported the source material, since the source material said there were a hair under 1M purchasers who ordered an average of 1.3 devices each, yielding about 1.25M watches pre-ordered, and that was just in the US alone on the first day for pre-orders. Later numbers from other sources indicated that global pre-orders on day one were closer to 2.5M units.
But yeah, watches are worn all over the world by hundreds of millions of people. His question is just plain silly.
I still remember not being happy when I came home to discover that my parents had purchased a cell phone for me so that they could keep in touch in case anything happened while I was at work for a summer internship in college. I remember staring at it in my hand—even before turning it on or setting it up—and thinking, "This device is a ball-and-chain." It stripped me of the control I had over when and under what circumstances people could contact me, and placed that control in their hands.
At least modern smartphones are very pretty and light balls-and-chain, but they still are what they still are. I live and breathe on the Internet (even did my grad research with an Internet research lab at a major university), but I relish when I'm able to be away for a week, whether it's a cruise, a cabin in the woods, or a few days camping out on a remote beach. Absolutely marvelous.
How did he hold it hostage? He disclosed the vulnerabilities to them privately before doing anything else. This wasn't a case of "shame them now, hope for a payout later". It was a case of "responsible disclose it privately, then do a stupid thing by disclosing it publicly before they've had a chance to pay you". As much as I don't like Groupon, I'm not sure which side of this disagreement I think is (most) in the wrong.