Avegant plans to show headset with virtual retinal display at CES

first_img This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only. Citation: Avegant plans to show headset with virtual retinal display at CES (2013, December 19) retrieved 18 August 2019 from https://phys.org/news/2013-12-avegant-headset-virtual-retinal-ces.html While the headset looks like another member of the goggles crop breaking on to the digital scene, where users attach some sort of wearable screens to their face, the Glyph stands out as the Glyph display projects light directly into your eye. He said the reason why they adopted that concept is because they are actually mimicking natural vision. Images just seem more realistic, vivid, natural and comfortable, unlike watching a cellphone or notebook computer all day, he remarked, “When I put this on,” he added, in placing the Glyph on his face, “the amount of depth is incredible….feels like I am looking out a window.”A Virtual Retinal Display uses a micromirror array and combination of optics to reflect an image directly onto the retina; the “screen” becomes the back of the eyeball. The picture comes across as sharp and vivid, and 3D images are exceptionally clear. One of the FAQ listed on the company’s site asks, “Is it safe?” Yes, is the given answer. “The light source is simply a low powered Light Emitting Diode (LED) – something like you would see at the end of a keychain light. The micromirror array and optics together create the unique image.”Looking into the device, the user sees an image that appears as an 80-inch screen eight feet away from the user. That translates, according to Avegant, to about a 45-degree field of view.Tang described his company as a startup intent on bringing out a “portable media platform.” According to the company, “Glyph can plug into any HDMI source and display any current content natively. This means sources from an XBox to a Playstation to a MacBook to an iPhone to an Android may be used while content from Blueray DVDs to video games to streaming movies can be watched.” More information: www.avegant.com/avegant-introd … -display-technology/ Dynamically reconfiguring images with flexible OLED FlexCam (w/ Video)center_img (Phys.org) —Ann Arbor, Michigan-based Avegant on Wednesday announced that a Kickstarter campaign will launch on January 22 on behalf of its product Glyph, a $499 headset. Glyph is also to go on display at the upcoming Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas from January 7 to 10. The shipped version will have one HDMI/MHL cable, and onboard battery power. The Glyph is a headset that integrates video display and audio experiences in a flip-down form factor. The result is a wearable display doubling as a set of headphones. The form factor, however, is not the most notable aspect of the product. CEO Ed Tang explained what he thinks is so special about Glyph, and that is a technology called virtual retinal display. © 2013 Phys.org Explore furtherlast_img read more

Apple to Pay 450 Million After Losing Federal Appeal in EBooks Case

first_img Free Webinar | Sept 5: Tips and Tools for Making Progress Toward Important Goals A divided federal appeals court on Tuesday said Apple orchestrated a conspiracy with five publishers to increase e-book prices, in a victory for the U.S. Justice Department.By a 2-1 vote, the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with a lower court judge that the conspiracy violated federal antitrust law, and that the judge acted properly in imposing an injunction to prevent a recurrence.Writing for the majority, Circuit Judge Debra Ann Livingston said that by organizing the conspiracy, “Apple found an easy path to opening its iBookstore,” while ensuring that marketwide prices rose to a level that Apple and the publishers wanted.The ruling will uphold not just Apple’s civil liability but also the terms of an injunction that limited its agreements with publishers.The decision also means Apple will be required to pay $450 million as part of a related settlement with 33 attorneys general and lawyers for a class of consumers. The accord had been contingent on Apple’s liability being upheld.Neither Apple nor the Justice Department, which had pursued the civil lawsuit to trial, responded immediately to requests for comment.The appeal followed a 2013 decision by U.S. District Judge Denise Cote in Manhattan finding that Apple played a “central role” in a conspiracy with publishers to eliminate retail price competition and raise e-book prices.The Justice Department, which secured the ruling following a non-jury trial, said the scheme caused some e-book prices to rise to $12.99 or $14.99 from the $9.99 price charged by the dominant player in the market, Amazon.com Inc.The publishers that the Justice Department said conspired with Apple include Lagardere SCA’s Hachette Book Group Inc, News Corp’s HarperCollins Publishers LLC, Penguin Group Inc, CBS Corp’s Simon & Schuster Inc and Verlagsgruppe Georg von Holtzbrinck GmbH’s Macmillan.In a dissenting opinion, U.S. Circuit Judge Dennis Jacobs said he would have reversed Cote’s 2013 ruling, finding that Apple’s behavior was pro-competitive in taking on a “monopolist,” Amazon, which controlled 90 percent of the market.”Apple took steps to compete with a monopolist and open the market to more entrants, generating only minor competitive restraints in the process,” Jacobs wrote.The case is U.S. v. Apple Inc, 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, No. 13-3741.(Additional reporting by Joseph Ax) This story originally appeared on Reuters June 30, 2015 2 min read Register Now » Attend this free webinar and learn how you can maximize efficiency while getting the most critical things done right.last_img read more

Is Initiative Q a pyramid scheme or just a really bad idea

first_imgIf things seem too good to be true, they probably are. That’s a pretty good motto to live by, and one that’s particularly pertinent in the days of fake news and crypto-bubbles. However, it seems like advice many people haven’t heeded with Initiative Q, a new ‘payment system’ developed by the brains behind PayPal technology. That’s not to say that Initiative Q certainly is too good to be true. But when an organisation appears to be offering almost hundreds of thousands of dollars to users who simply offer an email and then encourage others to offer theirs, caution is essential. If it looks like a pyramid scheme, then do you really want to risk the chance that it might just be a pyramid scheme? What is Initiative Q? Initiative Q, is, according to its founders, “tomorrow’s payment network.” On its website it says that current methods of payment, such as credit cards, are outdated. They open up the potential for fraud and other bad business practices, as well as not being particularly efficient. Initiative Q claims that is it going to develop an alternative to these systems “which aggregate the best ideas, innovations, and technologies developed in recent years.” It isn’t specific about which ideas and technological innovations its referring to, but if you read through the payment model it wants to develop, there are elements that sound a lot like blockchain. For example, it talks about using more accurate methods of authentication to minimize fraud, and improving customer protection by “creating a network where buyers don’t need to constantly worry about whether they are being scammed” (the extent to which this turns out to be deliciously ironic remains to be seen). To put it simply, it’s a proposed new payment system that borrows lots of good ideas that still haven’t been shaped into a coherent whole. Compelling, yes, but alarm bells are probably sounding. Who’s behind Initiative Q? There are very few details on who is actually involved in Initiative Q. The only names attached to the project are Saar Wilf, an entrepreneur who founded Fraud Sciences, a payment technology that was bought by PayPal in 2008, and Lawrence White, Professor of Monetary Theory and Policy and George Mason University. The team should grow, however. Once the number of members has grown to a significant level, the Initiative Q team say “we will continue recruiting the world’s top professionals in payment systems, macroeconomics, and Internet technologies.” How is Initiative Q supposed to work? Initiative Q explains that for the world to adopt a new payment network is a huge challenge – a fair comment, because after all, for it to work at all, you need actors within that network who believe in it and trust it. This is why the initial model – which looks and feels a hell of a lot like a pyramid or Ponzi scheme – is, according to Initiative Q, so important. To make this work, you need a critical mass of users. Initiative Q actually defends itself from accusations that it is a Pyramid scheme by pointing out that there’s no money involved at this stage. All that happens is that when you sign up you receive a specific number of ‘Qs’ (the name of the currency Initiative Q is proposing). These Qs obviously aren’t worth anything at the moment. The idea is that when the project actually does reach critical mass, it will take on actual value. Isn’t Initiative Q just another cryptocurrency? Initiative Q is keen to stress that it isn’t a cryptocurrency. That said, on its website the project urges you to “think of it as getting free bitcoin seven years ago.” But the website does go into a little more detail elsewhere, explaining that “cryptocurrencies have failed as currencies” because they “focus on ensuring scarcity” while neglecting to consider how people might actually use them in the real world.” The implication, then, is that Initiative Q is putting adoption first. Presumably, it’s one of the reasons that it has decided to go with such an odd acquisition strategy. Ultimately though, it’s too early to say whether Initiative Q is or isn’t a cryptocurrency in the strictest (ie. fully de-centralized etc.) sense. There simply isn’t enough detail about how it will work. Of course, there are reasons why Initiative Q doesn’t want to be seen as a cryptocurrency. From a marketing perspective, it needs to look distinctly different from the crypto-pretenders of the last decade. Initiative Q: pyramid scheme or harmless vaporware? Because no money is exchanged at any point, it’s difficult to call Initiative Q a ponzi or pyramid scheme. In fact it’s actually quite hard to know what to call it. As David Gerard wrote in a widely shared post from June, published when Initiative Q had a first viral wave, “the Initiative Q payment network concept is hard to critique — because not only does it not exist, they don’t have anything as yet, except the notion of “build a payment network and it’ll be awesome.” But while it’s hard to critique, it’s also pretty hard to say that it’s actually fraudulent. In truth, at the moment it’s relatively harmless. However, as David Gerard points out in the same post, if the data of those who signed up is hacked – or even sold (although the organization says it won’t do that) – that’s a pretty neat database of people who’ll offer their details up in return for some empty promises of future riches.last_img read more