Forum "celebs" and inventing arguments

[zacherynuk]

I'm unsure what is going on in this thread anymore... save to say that it is agreed that patents are controversial.

Today I read that google have had a successful patent on this: http://hothardware.com/News/Google-Pate ... pthCharts/ I mean FFS AND it took 6 years to come through.

Granted I don't know a lot about patents (or copyright law, for that matter) but I have seen enough to come to the conclusion that it's a way of swilling cash around and between big companies to feed lawyers and avoid tax on otherwise legitimate profits. And that if you aren't big enough to share the trough then you get eaten.

Seems like a mess to me.


Anyhoo- what's this thread about again ? Who has said what and applied for what now ? If only this forum was threaded.

[quietboy]

i read somewhere that if palmer patent his HMD it mean he betray the forum. i dont think so . this forum like any other forum was created to share and gather knowledge, and palmer has share his knowledge too. i know many people learn softwares and codes from internet. if they manage to build a good software or product, and they want to patent it, if thats not against the law i think that is a good practice of entrepreneurship.

if you dont want your knowledge to be use by someone else. simply dont share it in the public. it commonsense.

[blazespinnaker]

i read somewhere that if palmer patent his HMD it mean he betray the forum. i dont think so . this forum like any other forum was created to share and gather knowledge, and palmer has share his knowledge too. i know many people learn softwares and codes from internet. if they manage to build a good software or product, and they want to patent it, if thats not against the law i think that is a good practice of entrepreneurship.

if you dont want your knowledge to be use by someone else. simply dont share it in the public. it commonsense.

I think everyone was pretty happy to see Palmer use and leverage the forum and its advice. I know I am. (I love my Rift!)

A patent however, makes it so nobody else can leverage that advice.

[Likay]

Anyhoo- what's this thread about again ? Who has said what and applied for what now ? If only this forum was threaded.

No worries. The initial post invites to all kind of discussion. Due to the expressions of the "arguments" it's just an invite to a preschool sandbox war...
It could just as well go way offtopic (but it actually hasn't).

[zacherynuk]

A patent however, makes it so nobody else can leverage that advice.

Or it could be used as a leash to ensure the advice isn't used for e-v-i-l .. perhaps.

[quietboy]

i read somewhere that if palmer patent his HMD it mean he betray the forum. i dont think so . this forum like any other forum was created to share and gather knowledge, and palmer has share his knowledge too. i know many people learn softwares and codes from internet. if they manage to build a good software or product, and they want to patent it, if thats not against the law i think that is a good practice of entrepreneurship.

if you dont want your knowledge to be use by someone else. simply dont share it in the public. it commonsense.

I think everyone was pretty happy to see Palmer use and leverage the forum and its advice. I know I am. (I love my Rift!)

A patent however, makes it so nobody else can leverage that advice.

i don't see an agreement that this forum forbid patent pursuing after gathering knowledge either. i think the complain should be more addressed to the patent system. i just see palmer tried to practice good entrepreneurship by getting along with that patent competition.

[blazespinnaker]

i think the complain should be more addressed to the patent system. i just see palmer tried to practice good entrepreneurship by getting along with that patent competition.

Palmer hasn't applied for any patents yet, that I'm aware of. Perhaps he has done so provisionally and they just haven't showed up in the system though.

I doubt he will though, he doesn't seem like that sort of person. And even if he does, I don't see the patent offices granting anything - at least not based on the devkit.

[quietboy]

i think the complain should be more addressed to the patent system. i just see palmer tried to practice good entrepreneurship by getting along with that patent competition.

Palmer hasn't applied for any patents yet, that I'm aware of. Perhaps he has done so provisionally and they just haven't showed up in the system though.

I doubt he will though, he doesn't seem like that sort of person. And even if he does, I don't see the patent offices granting anything - at least not based on the devkit.

o man, so what is this thread all about? we talked about patent that you know palmer hasnt pursue yet. sorry man, i respect you, but i think this is just a pointless noise.

[blazespinnaker]

o man, so what is this thread all about? we talked about patent that you know palmer hasnt pursue yet. sorry man, i respect you, but i think this is just a pointless noise.

It isn't! It's a very fascinating discussion.

How do you generate original IP without understanding and appreciating what has come before? I think this is a somewhat strategical error on OVRs part. They should have innovated in an interesting way.

Jan and the Omni was smart about that. He created this neat (and TBH, somewhat risky) innovation which helps protect his product. I don't know if it's the right way to do things, but hey, at least he tried. Some things are worthy of patents - things that really take risks and move the state of art forward.

Anyways, I didn't start this thread. I was pretty ticked at all the childish responses though to the OP. They should have just ignored him if they didn't have anything useful to say.

[android78]

Has Palmer/Oculus applied for a specific patent, or is all of this patent discussion pre-emptive?
I do kind of see what blazespinnaker is saying about the lack of patent-ability of the oculus rift or components, unless there is some propriety method of sensor fusion they have invented that is used in the head tracking. I think that the optics used in the rift aren't that different to what was used in the viewmaster http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/View-master http://www.hackerconsortium.com/gallery ... emId=16984 kids toys (single element, high magnification) with the exception that the rift is using a much larger lens. But I think, what is unique about the whole thing (and what makes Palmer a hero to many, including myself), is that he actually pulled together all of the best ideas and MADE A PRODUCT. Not just that, but a product that was priced for the everyday person and which works better (for gaming) then any other product that seems to be in the consumer market. Ideas are the easy part, developing those ideas, refining them, dealing with manufacturing constraints, developing relationships with companies for mass production, etc would seem to be the part that hasn't been done until now.

Honestly, I really hope that Palmer/Oculus are happy to keep this from being patented. While I understand why patents exist, I have been pretty vocal in my opinion against them... mainly being that ideas are not owned by a single person, and it is getting less and less likely that any idea I have wont also be had by another person (even without any knowledge of me coming up with the idea), so why is it fair for me to 'OWN' any idea?

Basically, I reserve any judgement until I see the contents of any supposed patent that is being submitted, if any.

[quietboy]

o man, so what is this thread all about? we talked about patent that you know palmer hasnt pursue yet. sorry man, i respect you, but i think this is just a pointless noise.

It isn't! It's a very fascinating discussion.

How do you generate original IP without understanding and appreciating what has come before? I think this is a somewhat strategical error on OVRs part. They should have innovated in an interesting way.

Jan and the Omni was smart about that. He created this neat (and TBH, somewhat risky) innovation which helps protect his product. I don't know if it's the right way to do things, but hey, at least he tried. Some things are worthy of patents - things that really take risks and move the state of art forward.

Anyways, I didn't start this thread. I was pretty ticked at all the childish responses though to the OP. They should have just ignored him if they didn't have anything useful to say.

i understand your point. but its all up to the patent offices. i think they have experts who decide whether the rift is good enough for a patent claim. i think the forum cannot do anything about it. but when you said rift is a clone. i think you may hurt someone by undermining someone else hardwork.

[blazespinnaker]

but when you said rift is a clone. i think you may hurt someone by undermining someone else hardwork.

Ahh, fair enough. Perhaps that was a bit hyperbolic. I think maybe I stressed that point because I wasn't seeing a lot of credit being given to others lately.

[PalmerTech]

but when you said rift is a clone. i think you may hurt someone by undermining someone else hardwork.

Ahh, fair enough. Perhaps that was a bit hyperbolic. I think maybe I stressed that point because I wasn't seeing a lot of credit being given to others lately.

That is actually my main problem here. I am not claiming that everything in the Rift is unique, the first, or patentable. My main problem is that you were calling it a clone of something completely different, and also claiming that creating it did not take any "careful R&D". I assure you that it did!

As I said earlier, I give credit to the community all the time, and I don't think I am stealing credit for anyone. If you have an example of a time where I (not the media) did so, definitely let me know so I can make sure it does not happen again.

[Fredz]

I wouldn't use the Wikipedia for researching prior art.

I'm not relying on Wikipedia for searching prior art, I rely on what I have been reading for more than a year about the subject.

Check this out though: http://www.google.ca/patents/US4406532

Talking about looking for prior art, what you post is exactly what I said, optics for stereoscopic photography, without any reference to HMDs or virtual reality, because it was NASA Ames who introduced the lenses for this use.

Let me know if you can find a citation to an earlier HMD that is that advanced.

First, this citation hasn't anything to do with HMDs, second I already provided two examples of prior art, the Philco (1961) and The Sword of Damocles (1968, 1970 for the stereoscopic version).

If you want to see even older prior art relevant to wide FOV stereoscopy, you may have a look at this patent from Morton Heilig in 1960 (inventor of the Sensorama) : Stereoscopic television apparatus for individual use.

Claim :

Another object is to provide the optical units with a special lens arrangement which will bend the peripheral rays coming from the television tube so that they enter the eyes of the user from the sides thereof, creating the sensation of peripheral vision filling an arc of more than 140° horizontally and vertically.

Morton Heilig 1.png

Morton Heilig 2.png

The reason the LEEP used two lenses was because LCDs weren't high res enough to do the close focus lenses we have today. Check out my prior art thread this forum for more information.

The reason Eric Howlett used this arrangement of lenses was to get rid of the achromatic lenses for stereoscopic photography because they were too expensive, as explained here. He also said that there was prior art from Lieuwe Van Albada in 1936, using achromatic lenses (patent here).

[blazespinnaker]

I'm not sure those are references to HMDs that were as influential as the LEEP.

My argument is that the LEEP itself was a huge stride forward in HMD design and while clone was probably a little harsh ( in my opinion) the Rift shares more with the LEEP than the LEEP does with anything before it.

What has changed since then hasn't been new ideas in HMDs but rather the underlying components (LCD / IMU / GPU / CPU etc)

This is an interesting paper on correcting for distortion and the LEEP / EyePhone at VPL from 1991

http://www.creol.ucf.edu/Research/Publications/1524.PDF

[MrGreen]

This thread is 12 kinds of pathetic.

[MSat]

@Fredz

That Sensorama is an interesting find. I was starting to think the Rift was the first HMD with a large surface area goggle-style mount.

[Namielus]

This thread is 12 kinds of pathetic.

When I tuck myself in at night, I comfort myself thinking I did my part.

My life has a glimpse of value in that brief moment.

[Fredz]

That Sensorama is an interesting find. I was starting to think the Rift was the first HMD with a large surface area goggle-style mount.

Yeah the optical system is very interesting, even if it's not really an HMD. I especially like the concave form of the lens that is closer to the eye, probably nice for a high FOV but it could be a problem for the eyelashes. I wonder how I managed to miss this picture before...

[KBK]

This thread is 12 kinds of pathetic.

On a personal note, I reserve the right to be more pathetic at some time in the future. Maybe not today, but one never knows.

Some day! My time, will come....

(thumps chest with fist) (stands straight and looks proudly to the skies...)

[Namielus]

I hope to some day achieve the status of forum celebrity. Then my parents would finally be proud.

[KBK]

I hope to some day achieve the status of forum celebrity. Then my parents would finally be proud.

If it helps, I can always think of you that way.

[Namielus]

It would help. It would help so much.

[MSat]

That Sensorama is an interesting find. I was starting to think the Rift was the first HMD with a large surface area goggle-style mount.

Yeah the optical system is very interesting, even if it's not really an HMD. I especially like the concave form of the lens that is closer to the eye, probably nice for a high FOV but it could be a problem for the eyelashes. I wonder how I managed to miss this picture before...

It seems like an HMD to me - it's a display that's head mounted . Not sure if the lenses would be more annoying on your eyelashes than any other types of optics in a large FoV setup. I'm thinking they would actually be better because you might be able to have the lenses further away from your eyes.

[Fredz]

It seems like an HMD to me - it's a display that's head mounted

Sure, but I think it was before any kind of computerized representation and tracking was possible, he filed the patent in 1956 and it seems computer graphics has only been available in the 60s, so I'm not sure it can really be considered as an HMD.

Not sure if the lenses would be more annoying on your eyelashes than any other types of optics in a large FoV setup. I'm thinking they would actually be better because you might be able to have the lenses further away from your eyes.

Looking at the first image the eye is very close to the first lens, like with the Rift I guess. But the lens in the Rift is convex and it's already annoying for eyelashes, so I think a concave one would be even more annoying because the eyelashes would be closer. I'm not sure if it's possible to put the first lens farther from the eye, that may be a problem for eye relief.

[yautjacetanu]

An analysis of the markers of satire.

Ultimately the clearest sign of satire is that it would have to be pretty crazy for someone to actually think what it is they are suggesting. Its about taking a position that is possible for a human to think, then taking the underlying concepts to the extreme to a point no one would ever think them, for the purpose of highlighting those views and mocking them. The important marker is that the satire is something no one would ACTUALLY think.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satire#Techniques

A common feature of satire is strong irony or sarcasm—"in satire, irony is militant"[2]—but parody, burlesque, exaggeration,[3] juxtaposition, comparison, analogy, and double entendre are all frequently used in satirical speech and writing. This "militant" irony or sarcasm often professes to approve of (or at least accept as natural) the very things the satirist wishes to attack.

We see lots of these markers here.

Last post anyway

Whilst he appeared to take Direlight seriously by egging him on. Nate only commented on a very small silly part of Direlight's post. This bit doesn't really put forward any arguments but shows a kind a pathetic wandering off thing. This juxtoposition, appearing to take someone seriously but quoting a bit that couldn't possibly be taken seriously is a sign of satire.

Another triumph for cryptofascism,

Deliberating using big and peculiar words is a sign of satire. Some people do do this genuinely to appear clever and some people do actually just speak like this (Looking at you KBK) but this is actually a good marker of satire.

with these blindly indoctrinated
This is a case of hyperbole. Referring to the whole forum as "blindly indoctrinated" is over the top

sheeple

Another juxtoposition. The "blindly indoctrinated" is quite serious language in tone whereas sheeple is a fairly silly light-hearted tone. People putting forward a serious point of view are likely to go with only one of the tones. This is an example of parody too.

doing the persecuting even without instruction from their masters,

Again this is over the top. Why would anyone actually think that people on a discussion forum are actually controlled by specific masters? How would that actually happen? The forum is open to lots of people, it would be practically and logistically difficult for Palmer to directly influence me like this. Now... again there are positions close to this that a human might hold. For example, people do actually get influenced by tribe mentalities where a small group of celebrities can control masses. However, this is taking it too far. This is a sign of satire

and the obvious truth you've uncovered is ignored.

This is mocking in tone. Again it is over the top in nature. The stressing of "obvious" and "ignored" is a marker that this is not a genuine statement and is mocking as again. If someone were to actually assert this tone there would be no need to emphasise these words as they are already quite strong.

Somewhere just offstage,

Here he is alluding to a "conspiracy theory". Conspiracy theories by their nature are usually used as a pejorative as its a common crazy person view to see all the standard facts and evidence as pointing to something bigger behind the scenes rather then the most simple explanation. Conspiracy theorists get into a situation where every data point will confirm their theory to the point that nothing can bring them out of it. (Karl Popper sees this as a sign of pseudo-science). This fits a crazy person as they can live in their dream world regardless of any evidence that could challenge it. By comparing this Direlight to a conspiracy theorist he is mocking the person. As wikipedia mentions it this is comparison.

focus is subtly shifted to ad hominem attacks on your character, vicious calls of "you're kind of new here" and "what the hell are you talking about" displacing what would be open revolution if only these pawns would open their ears and eyes!

Again the over the top nature combined with ! is a sign of satire and mocking. I think this is also an example of literary burlesque http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burlesque_(literary).

You're so close to blowing the lid off this thing, Direlight, don't let the unanimous opinion of the entire forum that you're both wrong and annoying dissuade you from your duty!! It's entirely obvious Oculus has been a shadowy organization from its very inception, doubtless enlisting the NSA's help to sic black helicopters on those people who know the real truth (Palmer's military connections clearly run deeper than anyone knows, at least outside of Arlington and Gitmo).

Here the signs get really big again. Over the top emphasis, alluding to conspiracy theories and juxtaposition are used here. For example, there is no way, that even if Direlight was right that he is "close to blowing the lid off this thing" no one would think that. Referring the NSA is more conspiracy stuff and over the top. (There is no way anyone would believe Palmer is actually working with the NSA on this)

Those paragons of journalism at PC Gamer were definitely on to something (nevermind that they couldn't get through the two sentences supporting your case without wrongly identifying what state Palmer's from; everyone makes mistakes, right?), but the story never made it all the way out, deliberately swept under the rug by some editor who got a stern phone call from an agent of the Rothschilds.

Rothschild is a common thing conspiracy theorists talk about of controlling the world. He added emphasis on that word again as a marker of exaggeration and satire.

Keep fighting, Direlight!!! The media has been compromised!!!! The truth is out there, just waiting to be discovered in all its horrible entirety, and revealed to the world by some workaday hero who never gave up the fight!!!!! Palmer is on the verge of getting away with the biggest fraud in modern history here,

clear hyperbole. Even if the facts were true about Palmer there is no way this could count as the "biggest fraud in modern history" as Occulus hasn't really made much money! Nate is appearing to egg him on but really nate is mocking the pointless of this fight Direlight has decided to go with

and you're the only person who can see to it that he and all his co-conspirators wind up justly behind bars!!!!!!!!

Again with the over-the-top nature. Why would anyone actually think someone should be behind bars for this even if Direlight was telling the truth? The fact that Direlight is the "only person who can see this" is normally a sign that Direlight is wrong.

Pity we won't be able to read any more about this on MTBS, because you're never posting another word here, never ever. Right? Wait, don't answer that - it would destroy your credibility!

He's alluding to the "pseudo-scientific" re-enforcing nature of his conspiracy theory and Nate has neatly rounded up the end of his post referring the first thing he quoted. Direlight's post was written in such a way that he can go away feeling he has the moral high ground against Palmer and by saying "this is my last post" he protects himself from being challenged by any counter evidence. Nate is hightlighting this here by taking it to an extreme.

Its interesting because the stuff you've written about "genius" geekmaster fits with your inability to read lots of the signs. Lots of the signs are picked up because Nate is putting forward positions that no human being would ever actually think. But you pride yourself in having a mind that explores the things that humans think no human being could go into. Rather then looking that post and writing it off as impossible therefore a satire you see all those positions as possibly thought by humans.

Its interesting again because of how many of these techniques are very similar to the techniques one might use seriously in rhetoric to argue for a position. Again it comes down to the fact that Nate is arguing for a position that no one would ever be persuaded by.

[Fredz]

Seems my attempt at transforming this thread into a technical discussion lamentably failed...

[geekmaster]

An analysis of the markers of satire. ... We see lots of these markers here. ... (There is no way anyone would believe Palmer is actually working with the NSA on this) ...

Its interesting because the stuff you've written about "genius" geekmaster fits with your inability to read lots of the signs. Lots of the signs are picked up because Nate is putting forward positions that no human being would ever actually think. But you pride yourself in having a mind that explores the things that humans think no human being could go into. Rather then looking that post and writing it off as impossible therefore a satire you see all those positions as possibly thought by humans.

Its interesting again because of how many of these techniques are very similar to the techniques one might use seriously in rhetoric to argue for a position. Again it comes down to the fact that Nate is arguing for a position that no one would ever be persuaded by.

That "nobody would believe about Palmer and the NSA" thing sounds exactly like the stuff martinlandau/cleverusername was writing over at the oculusvr forums. I would never believe that nobody could believe that. There will always be people who will believe anything (i.e. the "Barnum Effect").

More quoted than original content in my posts about "genius" (and "madness").

And yes, the way I interpret language is to explore the entire maze of possible interpretations and harvest all the little treasures in every nook and cranny, then assemble them into my reality and try to figure out how that meshes with the writer's version of reality. It is much too easy to get stuck into a different local minima than the writer had in mind. However, it allows me to meld ideas from different fields of study, recognizing that unsolved problems in one field of study were solved long ago in another field of study using a completely different set of terminology. I think in pictures, and translating linguistic concept into virtual constructions in my mind allows me to see missing pieces and things that do not fit right, and to see similarities between completely unrelated concepts. I explore language like I explore all things. You can only find the center after dangling your legs off all the edges. Politics. Religion. Technology. Life. You name it. I have seen a lot and I have done a lot, but I am still a noob at heart.

Thank you for the wonderfully entertaining and educational (to me) post. I really did learn some socioliterary skills from this, I think...

[MSat]

It seems like an HMD to me - it's a display that's head mounted

Sure, but I think it was before any kind of computerized representation and tracking was possible, he filed the patent in 1956 and it seems computer graphics has only been available in the 60s, so I'm not sure it can really be considered as an HMD.

Not sure if the lenses would be more annoying on your eyelashes than any other types of optics in a large FoV setup. I'm thinking they would actually be better because you might be able to have the lenses further away from your eyes.

Looking at the first image the eye is very close to the first lens, like with the Rift I guess. But the lens in the Rift is convex and it's already annoying for eyelashes, so I think a concave one would be even more annoying because the eyelashes would be closer. I'm not sure if it's possible to put the first lens farther from the eye, that may be a problem for eye relief.

I didn't say it was an HMDCG (Head Mounted Display for Computer Graphics)

Wait, what were we talking about again?

The lenses are indeed close (but if they don't protrude out then they're not as close as on the Rift). It could also be that the drawing isn't a perfect representation, or that it was required for the particular lens that they used but not necessarily inherent in all convex-concave lenses.

[geekmaster]

Wait, what were we talking about again?

The lenses are indeed close (but if they don't protrude out then they're not as close as on the Rift). It could also be that the drawing isn't a perfect representation, or that it was required for the particular lens that they used but not necessarily inherent in all convex-concave lenses.

http://www.mtbs3d.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?f=138&t=16373#p99408

[nateight]

An analysis of the markers of satire.

I'm honored you would bother with such insightful analysis, yautjacetanu. Is this a sign I'm on my way to becoming one of these forum celebs? No autographs, please!

I would never believe that nobody could believe that. There will always be people who will believe anything

You're right again, geekmaster, this was the one flaw in yautjacetanu's teardown. I actually do believe several of these "crazy" things myself, and it is only through carefully stacking so many of them upon one another that the whole is revealed as the parody it was intended to be. Without getting into details that might invite an unwelcome political debate, my conspiracy theory of choice is the omnipresent influence of something like cultural hegemony (though I'm not much of a Marxist otherwise). I was only able to write a post that close to plausible because I know how people are perceived when they start talking publicly about what they sincerely believe are deep and unsettling truths, and I found Direlight's thesis that there is some deep and unsettling truth surrounding Palmer and Oculus as preposterous as your average housewife finds the idea that her opinions are being skillfully manipulated to achieve certain clandestine agendas. Perhaps the opinions I hold do make me "crazy", though I would contend that society itself fits that term better; in any event, there are a multitude of people more gullible and less "sane" than myself, and my wish for them all is simply that they give as much consideration to their messaging as they do the supposed truths they harbor.

If there was a primary marker of it being a work of satire, it was that I value MTBS as a place where ideological differences are set aside and productive technical discussions thereby occur (apologies to Fredz for derailing another noble effort at this; I'll get out of your way shortly). This is no more a place to espouse unsubstantiated claims of Palmer's professional impropriety than it is a place for discussions of the Bavarian Illuminati, and I'll try to constrain further works of satire to occasions where I feel they are germane to keeping it that way.

One last thing and I promise I'll go do something legitimately productive for once: geekmaster, I'd bet money the "inventing arguments" thing was intended to be synonymous with "fabricating irrational disagreements with my well-sourced facts and faultless logic", but I can definitely see how it could have at least one other meaning. A deep-seated persecution complex is often encountered in those who wind up being called conspiracy theorists, and Direlight's post is peppered with textbook examples.

See you in the FEMA concentration camps, Comrades!

[WiredEarp]

@blazespinnaker:

I'm not sure those are references to HMDs that were as influential as the LEEP.

Considering one of those HMD's was the SWORD OF DAMOCLES, I think you are absolutely wrong with that comment.

[blazespinnaker]

The SOD is cool, but I'm pretty sure any patent examiner would not ref it as prior art for the rift.

By influential, I'm mostly thinking in terms of prior art and patentability.

[Inscothen]

If the Rift was originally conceived as a open source HMD, how would this affect patents, and commercial competition in relation to patents for Palmer and OculusVR? For at least what the open HMD was at the time, never mind prior art and already previously patented HMDs. Would a person or company be able to make a Rift clone sans SDK circa pre-kickstarter and sell it without legal action from Oculus so long as nothing post kickstarter was copied?

[yautjacetanu]

[Direlight]

Hey guys, haven't really posted since this incident and wish I wasn't attacked for such a mundane comment. This is my first time reading this thread since I basically stopped coming here as it felt like the moment someone disagrees with you and is more popular, general forum population turns against you. That's the point of this thread mainly.

Just want to clear up the misconceptions:

- Geekmaster is mad cause I said DVI and didn't specify which type, trivial complaint.

- Palmer disagreed with how I worded a comment about Doom 3 warping and it seems I failed to clarify my statement as we both kept arguing. I have nothing major against Palmer, and I genuinely tried dropping it in that thread, but didn't happen. He apologized though and I do as well.

- People talking about NSA etc. and the bulk of this thread doesn't have anything to do with what I was writing about. People are literally confusing my posts with other ones. My main point is that Carmack contributed to getting the Rift working on Doom 3 and somehow that turned into me being inexperienced, forum troll etc.

- Some of what I wrote was conjecture, but I definitely didn't attempt to say it's a giant conspiracy with governments etc.. Carmack has gone into more detail on what he did to the original prototype after he joined oculus. People can look it up online as any source I've linked to previously is deemed incorrect.


I might of lashed out at people, my fault, but the ad hominem attacks are unwarranted I think. I'm mainly interested in FREEpie (love helping it out) for my own internal projects, so I'll stick to that section primarily.

[cybereality]

Wow! Huge grave-dig. But funny enough I was thinking about this thread the other day.

Anyhow, I don't think anyone has a vendetta against you. Please feel free to start posting again and being part of the community.

[geekmaster]

Wow! Huge grave-dig. But funny enough I was thinking about this thread the other day.

Anyhow, I don't think anyone has a vendetta against you. Please feel free to start posting again and being part of the community.

Now you made me go back and read this whole thread!

Anyway, I found my old "half time break" post in here (worth checking out just for fun, especially the "Carmack" song):

Let the nerd rage be forgotten for awhile. This free "Hacker's Heaven" MP3 song from Steve Savitzky is what the Rift is all about:
http://steve.savitzky.net/Songs/heaven/heaven.mp3

Although this song seems to be more about John Carmack's "other hobby", it applies well here too.

And then there is the most excellent other kind of "Nurd Rage":

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_g_ml8tAnWE

Smile and enjoy!

Well, this was a funny diversion too:

this is the worst thread on the whole internet. im serious. i logged in just to say that. thanks for not locking it so i could point that out. maybe we could put a disclaimer in the thread title. worst thread. whole internet. whhoooolee internet. and lets put a time reference on it ... ever. i feel like i need to say it one more time but i wont. ok i cant help it. ... worst thread .... whole internet ... ever.

[Okta]

Around KS the forum did begin to fill with 'new' posters as can be seen by the lynching in this thread and general decline of posts. Being one of the old timers here I remember mostly how things went down. Palmer had been working on and testing a range of HMD's as were a few of us. No one here new exactly what Palmer did or didn't try as he had slightly clammed up heading to his last few gens of HMD's because he wanted to go somewhere with them and did. There was nothing special or revolutionary about his pre Rift, the big kick came when he said he was going to put together a kit form for whoever was interested. This seemed like a good idea because Palmer had done all the leg work with lenses and had made up a cardboard folding body. This also led to myself and possibly other halting there own HMD experiments. This is also around the time Carmack became involved and then the KS. I don't think Palmer would feel the need buffing up the history, but of course he will fire back If someone want to discredit his efforts. And besides, being that Palmer and JC are now working together in the same company, do you think Palmer would fire off claims on an open forum about what he and JC did that weren't accurate?

[Direlight]

If anyone was actually paying attention, someone posted stuff from I think, Martin Landau (not me, I only vaguely mentioned him to show that others might also have helped) then twisted it into making it come from me, "Direlight's thesis". The bulk of the thread goes into patent issues and Geekmaster posting off-topic videos. I lashed out at people, but not nearly as rabid as some people here. My original post is mundane and based off what Carmack said in earlier and more recent interviews. If people have issue with that or it's "incorrect" then take it up with the people writing these supposedly incorrect articles. Never said Palmer didn't make the Rift, and I simple pointed out that Carmack enhanced it for e3/doom and that he was being boastful & argumentative. If anyone can prove otherwise, feel free. Carmack himself could say I'm wrong, but that would be contradicting himself. Also, the fact that Carmack runs the technical side of the Rift (assuming that's what a CTO does) doesn't exactly diminish my claim.

People should understand too that developers also can be wrong themselves sometimes and have egos etc. People blindly attacking someone for insulting their hero is what I meant by culty. I thought everyone was joking in the Palmer messiah threads, I was. Posting my original comment so people can reflect how absurd this thread became:

You posted it here I think and Carmack wanted to look at it, pretty much randomly. He then saw where you were going with the spherical lens warping for wider FoV and then got the idea to correct for this using the software.

That statement has little to do with the bulk of this thread and I freely admitted it's worded poorly. People turning that into a patent debate and Martin Landau's linked post about Palmer himself is/was entirely not of my doing and clearly illustrating my point that mtbs is weird/hostile at times. Good luck trying to convince me otherwise after 4 pages of thread derailment and personal attacks, and I wasn't even posting responses.