02-22-2019 03:18 PM
Interesting article about providing HoloLens to the military.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-47339774
50 Microsoft employees let the company know that's not what they signed up for. It's probably going to become a big issue as AR & VR becomes commonplace in various aspects of life.
My view is, where military cutting edge technology is concerned, that train left the station a long time ago. But I can completely understand the employees viewpoints, if the possibility of military use wasn't in their job descriptions, they seem to me to have a legitimate grievance.
I assume Oculus have mechanisms in place to allow it's employees have a say. Or are at least more explicit in the contracts they write up.
02-22-2019 06:12 PM
02-23-2019 01:17 AM
Totally agree. But an employees contract should include a clause stating something like 'Microsoft reserves the right to use the technology you're developing in any way it sees fit'. Also, not sure what percentage that 50 is of the total HoloLens development team. Maybe a small percentage but more than .04% I'm guessing (unless the letter signatories were form all areas of Microsoft's business).
The problem probably stems from the big divide between what most people associate VR/AR use with when they become developers, I.e. entertainment, and a $480m contract for military use (Edit: and the line between what Microsoft has previously done with military contracts and what is now seen as weapons development).
Edit:
Incidentally I have no issue with military use of technology and I made the same arguments about engineering saving lives rather than costing lives when I was asked the same question during my very first job interview for aircraft technician with the RAF.
I think though that HoloLens devs wouldn't have had a similar question asked at their interviews, and looking at the figures, 100,000 headsets for the military is a large enough percentage of overall sales to warrant that question being asked.
Just my view.
02-23-2019 01:50 AM
02-23-2019 02:07 AM
02-23-2019 05:58 AM
02-23-2019 06:02 AM
VR would only be used for training purposes in the military.
I have shown one of our pilots my VR rig for DCS and he liked it a hell of a lot more then their ancient simulator.
We already have AR helmets being used for our fighter pilots translating information directly from their HUD and PAD in front of their eyes.
It helps reaction time because pilots are not constantly glancing in three different locations while trying to maintain contact.
Lets not bring up that abysmal failure of a HMD that the F35 was supposed to use.
There is a reason that they had to redesign the 75% of the F35 cockpit to put a HUD back into it.
To much information is just to much information and can be disorienting.
02-23-2019 06:25 AM
02-23-2019 06:56 AM
02-24-2019 01:42 PM