Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Student Uses Oculus Rift and Kinect To Create Body Swap Illusion

timothy posted about 2 months ago | from the why-are-you-hitting-yourself dept.

Technology 88

kkleiner writes Using an Oculus Rift virtual reality headset, Microsoft Kinect, a camera, and a handful of electrical stimulators, a London student's virtual reality system is showing users what it's like to swap bodies. Looking down, they see someone else's arms and legs; looking out, it's someone else's point of view; and when they move their limbs, the body they see does the same (those electrical stimulators mildly shock muscles to force a friend to mirror the user's movements). It's an imperfect system, but a fascinating example of the power of virtual reality. What else might we use VR systems for? Perhaps they'll prove useful in training or therapeutic situations? Or what about with robots, which would be easier to inhabit and control than another human? The virtual body swap may never fully catch on, but generally, virtual reality will likely prove useful for more than just gaming and entertainment.

cancel ×

88 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Will it let me swap bodies with Miranda Kerr? (5, Funny)

AnontheDestroyer (3500983) | about 2 months ago | (#47570925)

I would never leave the house.

Re:Will it let me swap bodies with Miranda Kerr? (1)

viperidaenz (2515578) | about 2 months ago | (#47570977)

If you want a sex change and plastic surgery, those are already available.

Re:Will it let me swap bodies with Miranda Kerr? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47571177)

Why are you assuming gnet are male?

Re:Will it let me swap bodies with Miranda Kerr? (1)

cygnwolf (601176) | about 2 months ago | (#47573375)

Why are you assuming gnet are male?

isn't everyone on the internet?

Re:Will it let me swap bodies with Miranda Kerr? (1)

Tablizer (95088) | about 2 months ago | (#47571269)

and has been for millions of years: a swift kick to the [bleep]

Re:Will it let me swap bodies with Miranda Kerr? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47571677)

Then again, at least initially, it might also be fun to leave the house as Miranda Kerr.

While I do tend to get bored eventually, I've had some good times playing Barbie Dreamhouse Party with my daughter. As a middle-aged overweight man, I don't really look good in anything - so selecting what to wear for myself is just an unpleasant chore. But it's really a different feeling when you're (imagining that you're) an attractive young lady who looks good in pretty much anything.

I never used to understand the appeal of shopping for clothes. But if I had a different body (i.e. female and attractive) then I could really have some fun with it.

Will it let me swap bodies with Miranda Kerr? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47571769)

> What else might we use VR systems for?

Porn.

Next question.

No but you could be a Kardashian (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47571851)

Garick would be crushed

Re:Will it let me swap bodies with Miranda Kerr? (1)

stonedead (2571785) | about 2 months ago | (#47575383)

So that you can GFY atlast? Not gonna happen, buddy.

Why robots? (1, Flamebait)

viperidaenz (2515578) | about 2 months ago | (#47570981)

Homeless people would be cheaper than robots.

Re:Why robots? (1)

peragrin (659227) | about 2 months ago | (#47571347)

to expensive. Homeless people need food and a place to sleep. Robots just need electricity at $.10 a KWH.

Why do you think business argue against paying people a livable wage?

Re:Why robots? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47571859)

Because they want government welfare, for corporations, not people.

Re:Why robots? (1)

viperidaenz (2515578) | about 2 months ago | (#47572061)

If you have control of the homeless person, why do you need to pay them?
The capital investment for a robot is much higher than a homeless person too.

If the robot is destroyed because you sent it to the front line of a war or cut the wrong wire defusing a bomb, it's an expensive mistake.

Re:Why robots? (3, Funny)

davester666 (731373) | about 2 months ago | (#47572307)

you obviously have never heard the whining of some homeless guy only partially blown up. they can go on and on for days. the "please, can you help me find my arm", "would you mind making a tourniquet for my leg with this diaper'. and then bleeding all over the place.

you pretty much have to find a new route to work for at least a week.

saw a movie sorta about this (2)

turkeydance (1266624) | about 2 months ago | (#47570983)

a long, long time ago. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B... [wikipedia.org]

Re:saw a movie sorta about this (4, Informative)

horm (2802801) | about 2 months ago | (#47571003)

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt01... [imdb.com] Malkovich malkovich malkovich malkovich?

Re:saw a movie sorta about this (1)

pushing-robot (1037830) | about 2 months ago | (#47571949)

Not that I can blame you, but I guess you've all blocked this [wikipedia.org] from your memories.

Re:saw a movie sorta about this (1)

BlueLightning (442320) | about 2 months ago | (#47572781)

Not that I can blame you, but I guess you've all blocked this [wikipedia.org] from your memories.

No, but I wish I could.

Re:saw a movie sorta about this (1)

ruir (2709173) | about 2 months ago | (#47572971)

I havent blocked it, I gave up watching it in the first 15 minutes. Yup, very bad movie.

Scientific Curse Dolls! (1)

thieh (3654731) | about 2 months ago | (#47571005)

So when will people sell Technovoodoo service?

It's been done before... sort of (4, Informative)

Alien1024 (1742918) | about 2 months ago | (#47571063)

Not a new idea [vimeo.com] . Only they didn't use Kinect or electrical stimulators, so they just relied on the partners' willingness to mirror each other's movements.

Re:It's been done before... sort of (5, Funny)

Immerman (2627577) | about 2 months ago | (#47571109)

Yeah, but it's not real science unless someone is wearing a shock collar...

Re:It's been done before... sort of (1)

gstoddart (321705) | about 2 months ago | (#47571883)

Yeah, but it's not real science unless someone is wearing a shock collar...

Hmmm ... it's only science if some of the subjects can shock some of the other subjects without actually knowing who (including themselves) will get shocked.

Otherwise, I think it's just kinky adults, and the goth kids. ;-)

Re:It's been done before... sort of (1)

catmistake (814204) | about 2 months ago | (#47574567)

You have a hint of the truth there. Once again, as I have said in previous comments on earlier stories about HMD and virtual reality, this body illusion has absolutely nothing to do with the "power" of virtual reality, and still, so far, no tech company has any idea what they have (and I still hope to scoop them all with my subsequent patents, invalidating theirs, and make a fortune suing them... because their patents incorrectly describe the invention, or how it works). Don't bother replying, I'm not going to give it away.

Re:It's been done before... sort of (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47578155)

Great story, bro.

Strange Days (3, Insightful)

thecountryofmike (744040) | about 2 months ago | (#47571093)

Cool movie :) Strange Days [imdb.com]

Wow this is super old news (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47571159)

They were using the Oculus rift to look down at genitals of swapped bodies when it first came out fools.

http://gizmodo.com/oculus-rift-lets-you-see-what-it-would-be-like-to-swap-1505973834

Fatsos (0, Flamebait)

Flozzin (626330) | about 2 months ago | (#47571187)

Maybe now we can have fat people swap into a thin persons body so they can experience what not being a fat piece of shit is like and lose some fucking weight.

Re:Fatsos (3, Insightful)

water-and-sewer (612923) | about 2 months ago | (#47571223)

Conversely, maybe we can now take snide, fucking smart-alecks and swap them into the body of a lardass so they can experience the humiliation and despair of being obese, so people like you can have a little more empathy for the human condition.

Meanwhile, every tranny on earth just got serious wood thinking about the potential of this technology.

Re:Fatsos (-1, Troll)

Flozzin (626330) | about 2 months ago | (#47571285)

Conversely, maybe we can now take snide, fucking smart-alecks and swap them into the body of a lardass so they can experience the humiliation and despair of being obese, so people like you can have a little more empathy for the human condition.

Implying I haven't lost weight and fought to keep it there.

Re:Fatsos (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47571317)

Then you might want to show some fucking empathy. No one is going to think you used such harsh language because you used to feel that way about yourself, they're going to think you're just a dumb, judgmental prick.

Re:Fatsos (-1, Troll)

Flozzin (626330) | about 2 months ago | (#47571343)

Then you might want to show some fucking empathy. No one is going to think you used such harsh language because you used to feel that way about yourself, they're going to think you're just a dumb, judgmental prick.

Empathy for the class of people that are fat, know it and make excuses. No fuck that and fuck them. There are so many reasons not to be fat and the majority of them aren't the fact that they are fucking eye sores.

Re:Fatsos (2)

ganjadude (952775) | about 2 months ago | (#47571375)

You sound like an ex smoker who never shuts up about how bad smoking is... here is a clue, we are happy you didnt something to better yourself, but shut the fuck up, and stop acting like a smug prick just because you bettered yourself and think anyone else who doesnt is a lazy sack of shit

Re:Fatsos (-1, Troll)

Flozzin (626330) | about 2 months ago | (#47571421)

Prove otherwise. Calorie in Calorie out. You can't make fat from nothing.

Re:Fatsos (1)

ganjadude (952775) | about 2 months ago | (#47571517)

Every person is different, not everyone cares if.they have a few pounds on, other people care are fashon, while.others dont give a flying fuck. Generally people who had a "problem" and fixed it do one of two things, move on with their lives, or become so obsessed with the fact that they beat their "problem" that they spend their entire lives telling everyone.how wrong they are

Re:Fatsos (2, Insightful)

Flozzin (626330) | about 2 months ago | (#47571689)

The great rallying cry. Not everyone cares if they are fat pieces of shit. Talking about the USA now..When everyone is now forced to be on health care, which means its not longer private, its public. We have a right to tell other people that they are living unhealthy lives. Because I now pay for it.

Also you act like fat people just keep to themselves. They don't. They aren't. They take up 2 seats + seats on airplanes for instance. They also have a fat acceptance movement going on.

if.they have a few pounds on

I'm not talking about a few lbs overweight. But unfortunately, when you say a few lbs, in todays terms, you now mean obese people. Not people that literally have 2-5 lbs to lose.

Re:Fatsos (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47573315)

Let's talk when everyone stops being a dick to someone when they are still children. Destroy your own self worth and try to care about yourself after being mentally fucked for the rest of your life.

BTW Fuck you, you seem to be a dick.

Re:Fatsos (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47574147)

"We have a right to tell other people that they are living unhealthy lives. Because I now pay for it."

No you don't. Just simply, no, you don't.

Do others have the right to tell you that you must always drive the speed limit, for -them-, because they might pay a tiny sliver of the additional risk involved?

In any case, this is all moot. Studies have shown that the public costs for the "healthy" end up being significantly higher than the severely overweight or smokers. Statistically, the latter drop dead of things like heart attacks, cheap. The former linger on and on with enormously expensive chronic diseases, like Alzheimer's.

So, yeah, turns out -you're- the drain on society, ass.

Re:Fatsos (1)

operagost (62405) | about 2 months ago | (#47574769)

I wonder if either of you see the irony-- because the government arguably overstepped its bounds by forcing everyone to buy health insurance, now it gets to claim it can overstep its bounds even further by telling you what you can do with your body.

Government is the cause of, and solution to, all of life's problems.

Re:Fatsos (1)

DeputySpade (458056) | about 2 months ago | (#47575757)

Do others have the right to tell you that you must always drive the speed limit, for -them-, because they might pay a tiny sliver of the additional risk involved

Actually, yes. This is precisely the reasoning behind helmet laws for motorcycle riders in some states.

Re:Fatsos (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47576157)

We have a right to tell other people that they are living unhealthy lives. Because I now pay for it.

We've been paying for it for decades [wikipedia.org] , as we should be. Now we've just decided that they have to pay for it too, and BTW, have some coverage for preventative care to reduce their own risks and everyone's costs at the same time. Oh, the horrors!

Re:Fatsos (1)

Killjoy_NL (719667) | about 2 months ago | (#47579743)

You acting like an asshole like this might also have the result that somebody will be inclined to break your face and/or other parts of your body.
Since healthcare pays for that as well, we have a right to request that you don't act like a dick so you won't get your ass beaten for which healthcare pays.

Re:Fatsos (4, Insightful)

AK Marc (707885) | about 2 months ago | (#47571739)

Calorie in Calorie out.

That's not how it works. Celery has calories (in the sense that burning it will generate heat), but has negative digestive calories (in the sense that pulling the nutrients from it and pushing the waste out will burn more calories than gained by the process).

Some people have low absorption. They eat anything they want, and don't get fat. Others are much more efficient. The efficient can eat according to any diet you pick that is sustainable for an inefficient person, and still gain weight.

You don't make fat from nothing, but some people can get fat on 1/2 the calories of someone else. Blaming the person with the efficient metabolism for eating "only" 75% of the other person (despite having a nearly identical hunger response), makes you a gigantic asshole.

Re:Fatsos (4, Insightful)

chmod a+x mojo (965286) | about 2 months ago | (#47572043)

I would still argue one point then: weight stability has nothing to do with internal absorption.

If a person is gaining weight that means their caloric intake is in excess of what they are using. If a stable weight is desired they must either reduce intake or increase calorie usage into a balance. Even if they have a high hunger response and can't reduce caloric intake they could do more activities that burn calories rather continue a more sedentary lifestyle.

The thing that really sucks is that moving around more ( burning calories ) is much much more difficult to start once obesity has set in due to how obesity affects the body. Stresses on joints and support bones are much greater, Oxygen absorption is generally lower, and depending on how obese the person is pressure on the diaphragm may make hard breathing even more difficult.

Between the difficulty in getting started exercising and the difficulty in breaking bad eating habits makes it very hard for many obese people to lose the weight. This does not excuse them from giving up before trying though.

Re:Fatsos (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47572389)

And some people have health issues that prevent them from moving about as much as they'd like. I speak from experience, it's pretty unpleasant when you *want* to exercise but you can't do so.

Re:Fatsos (1)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | about 2 months ago | (#47573133)

There are other factors too. Some foods get metabolised into energy in different ways, affecting metabolic rate. High fructose is a particular issue, as it's very common in the American diet and rapidly becoming so in Europe too - it causes blood sugar to peak quickly, so the body starts putting on fat stocks right away, then falls and leaves the person quickly hungry for more sugary goodness.

On the basic model though, you're right. The key to weight management is to eat less energy and exercise more. Easier said than done, as it requires defying some powerful instinctive urges.

Re:Fatsos (4, Insightful)

ledow (319597) | about 2 months ago | (#47572555)

"Fat? No, I'm efficient!"

Though I agree in sentiment, there's still the case that if you don't eat more than X weight of food, you can't put on more than X amount of weight.

The ones who are happy being fat, fine. The ones who are trying to lose weight and can't because of their "hunger"... that's the problem. Because it's hardly ever a celery that they pig out on, but chocolate and other high-fat foods.

It's still down, in the end, to a question of willpower. If you want to slim, you'll allow yourself to feel a little more hungry and - at the same time - find ways to cure the hunger that don't involve fat.

Your gut is just as adaptable as any other part of you - it can learn, given time. And though I don't want to trivialise the effort of losing weight, especially if you have medical conditions or even just suffer from the inherent medical conditions of being overweight (such as it being more difficult on your joints to exercise), there's still a willpower game at play here.

I'm sure there are people who struggle 24 hours a day against hunger and lose. And I'm sure there are a hundred times as many who win for as long as they want to and then give up. And I'm sure there are a hundred times as many again who say they are trying, and don't even bother.

There are weight-loss TV programs where they "stalk" the contestants. They know they could be watched. They know they have cameras in their house. They know they have to cut down. But still they have midnight snacks and go shopping for high-calorie food (if it's not in the house, at least you have to expend more effort than normal to go get it if you have a craving!).

Not everyone is a lard-ass. But equally not every overweight person struggles against an unbeatable desire to eat only high-calorie food.

Re:Fatsos (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47573421)

Though I agree in sentiment, there's still the case that if you don't eat more than X weight of food, you can't put on more than X amount of weight.

There is still quite a bit of variation of what that X is. I've seen people with office work start a half hour commute on a bicycle each way and lose ten-20 pounds without changing their 2000-2400 calorie a day diet. I ride my bike half an hour each way, work out for half an hour 5 nights a week, use a standing desk at work, and still have to keep my diet under 2000 calories to keep things balanced, and when losing weight had to go down to 1200-1500 calories a day.

Re:Fatsos (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47575501)

It is irrelevant that X varies from person to person. For any particular individual, X will remain pretty consistent from day to day. What other people do, in terms of caloric intake and exercise, will not make any difference regarding YOUR weight. Yet this non-sequitur is commonly raised in these discussions. Why?

Antidepressants part of the problem? (1)

PPalmgren (1009823) | about 2 months ago | (#47573455)

"Fat? No, I'm efficient!"

Though I agree in sentiment, there's still the case that if you don't eat more than X weight of food, you can't put on more than X amount of weight.

The ones who are happy being fat, fine. The ones who are trying to lose weight and can't because of their "hunger"... that's the problem. Because it's hardly ever a celery that they pig out on, but chocolate and other high-fat foods.

It's still down, in the end, to a question of willpower. If you want to slim, you'll allow yourself to feel a little more hungry and - at the same time - find ways to cure the hunger that don't involve fat.

Your gut is just as adaptable as any other part of you - it can learn, given time. And though I don't want to trivialise the effort of losing weight, especially if you have medical conditions or even just suffer from the inherent medical conditions of being overweight (such as it being more difficult on your joints to exercise), there's still a willpower game at play here.

I'm sure there are people who struggle 24 hours a day against hunger and lose. And I'm sure there are a hundred times as many who win for as long as they want to and then give up. And I'm sure there are a hundred times as many again who say they are trying, and don't even bother.

There are weight-loss TV programs where they "stalk" the contestants. They know they could be watched. They know they have cameras in their house. They know they have to cut down. But still they have midnight snacks and go shopping for high-calorie food (if it's not in the house, at least you have to expend more effort than normal to go get it if you have a craving!).

Not everyone is a lard-ass. But equally not every overweight person struggles against an unbeatable desire to eat only high-calorie food.

I've found antidepressants have negatively impacted my ability to keep my body where I want it to be, as odd as that sounds.

I'm taking an antidepressant for OCD problems, and since I've been taking it, I've had a significant reduction in trichotillomania (hair pulling) as well as other OCD problems and face numbness from extreme anxiety. However, I find that the antidepressant has neutered the highs as well as balancing the lows. I find I'm more complacent with things that bother me about myself, muting the motivation to correct them, and also killing most of the endorphin rush from exercising. Its a vicious cycle, because as you gain weight you get upset about your weight/wardrobe, and thus the original reason you were taking the antidepressant is replaced by your new unhappiness about your weight. I've tried to ween off the antidepressant but the OCD came back with a vengance as well as crippling levels of anxiety because I'm no longer used to it.

Its like being stuck between a rock and a hard place. Staying in shape was much easier without the antidepressant, but functioning and managing my OCD was much harder. I guess where I'm going from this anecdote is that the heavy use/overperscription of antidepressants may be causing others to get in this frustrating conundrum.

Re:Antidepressants part of the problem? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47573849)

Weight gain is a known side effect of SSRIs; serotonin has an important role in the functioning of the digestive system. In my case it only resulted in raging morning sickness for the first month I was on them.

Re:Fatsos (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47575131)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative-calorie_food
>While this concept is popular in dieting guides, there is no scientific evidence supporting the idea that any food is a negative-calorie food.

Re:Fatsos (2, Insightful)

Flozzin (626330) | about 2 months ago | (#47571385)

Double post. Be fat. Lose fucking weight. And listen to all your fat friends bemoan that you are on a diet and that you aren't 'fat' because you now aren't as big of lard ass as they are. "If anyone should be losing weight it should be me." Is what they say to you as you sit there, still grossly overweight but have lost a few lbs.

The fat community does nothing but road block people trying to lose weight. So fuck them. They sit there with a poor me complex and rail against anyone actively doing something about their weight. It shows to them that they too can lose weight and they want nothing to do with it. So no. I took shit for being fat. Then I took shit for losing weight.

Anyone that has actually done this can certainly understand why I hate fat asses.

Re:Fatsos (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47571493)

Anyone that has actually done this can certainly understand why I hate fat asses.

Speak for your own myopic self. I've watched quite a few people go on diet and exercise regimes, and none of them were blocked by friends and other overweight people. The only ones that got shit were the ones that assumed everyone had was in the exact same situation as them and could preach to others that they were one simple step away from a solution. Them getting shit had nothing to do with being thin or fat, but their attitude, which also would come up on other subjects.

I at least noticed in grad school, when sharing a house with several other people where we all ate the same food and had the same work schedules, that some people gained weight while others didn't. And that when several of us started an exercise routine and took up basketball together, we lost weight at quite different rates. I ended up losing 20 lbs in the second half of grad school, and another 20 lbs after that, and heard nothing but encouragement from others, including some friends that never managed to lose any weight in that time period. Although it probably helped I didn't going around telling people what they had to do, and gave multiple suggestions when actually prompted, knowing it will take different amounts of effort for different people.

Re:Fatsos (1)

Flozzin (626330) | about 2 months ago | (#47571683)

I've watched

Clearly you know what's going on then. /sarcasm

Re:Fatsos (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47573317)

I'm not the poster who made the previous AC comment, but it is pretty clear that poster did more than just watch considering the second half was about their own experience losing weight too. Trolling people takes at least more reading comprehension than that.

Re:Fatsos (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47572037)

> Conversely, maybe we can now take snide, fucking smart-alecks and swap them into the body of a lardass s

Too late

This time, make your mommy split up the oreos for you, so you don't have to take your hands off the keyboard.

Re:Fatsos (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47574325)

This idea is glorious and has real weight loss potential. This way the thin person takes the fatty to the gym and via electric shock, makes them work out.

I imagine trainers will be able to make a lot of money with this. "No Ms Lardasski, I just do a body swap then do my regular workout and we both get the benefit!"*

*Trainers will probably end up wearing earphones to cover up the shrieks and begging as they turn up the voltage to make their loaner body do what they want it to do. There will also be some dead fatties when their hearts go pop, due to fit people trying to make a quick buck with this gear, without considering what the couch potato's body can actually do.

Re:Fatsos (1)

operagost (62405) | about 2 months ago | (#47574713)

Maybe we can now take basement-dwelling slashdotters and put them in the body of someone who goes outside and actually contacts other people in meatspace. The only problem I can see is the brightness of the daystar causing sensory overload.

Re:Fatsos (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47576475)

Conversely, maybe we can now take snide, fucking smart-alecks and swap them into the body of a lardass so they can experience the humiliation and despair of being obese, so people like you can have a little more empathy for the human condition.

Meanwhile, every tranny on earth just got serious wood thinking about the potential of this technology.

You do realize that the word "tranny" and your implication that they are all looking to get "wood". Is even more myopic and intolerant.

Who needs empathy lessons now?

Re:Fatsos (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47571231)

Fat people are more likely to survive an apocalypse.

Re:Fatsos (1)

ganjadude (952775) | about 2 months ago | (#47571367)

Right? And we can swap white people with black people so the can see what thats like, and men with women and so on, this of the sensitivity training potential!!!

Re:Fatsos (1)

Flozzin (626330) | about 2 months ago | (#47571441)

Driven people will never be stopped by race in America today. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v... [youtube.com]

Re:Fatsos (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47584829)

Well I have a fat fetish, so I would love to be swapped into a fat person's body and walk around being fat. If they could walk around in my (relatively slim) body and fatten it up for me as well, that would just be the icing on the cake. Then, I could be the fat guy for later swaps with thin people, and fatten them up too! The sexually exciting possibilities are endless!

Gender-swap porn just got a lot more interesting. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47571255)

Gender-swap porn just got a lot more interesting.

I'm just saying.

It would not me a robot (2)

wbr1 (2538558) | about 2 months ago | (#47571341)

A robot is typically at least semi-autonomous.

The word you are looking for is Waldo. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R... [wikipedia.org]

Showing what it's like to swap bodies (2)

Mister Liberty (769145) | about 2 months ago | (#47571389)

Why do I^Hyou have the feeling that ''Showing" what it's like to swap bodies doesn't quite cut it?

The not-so-cool psych experiment to participate in (1)

Jumunquo (2988827) | about 2 months ago | (#47571471)

It sounded really cool until it got to the part where they "mildly shock."

Like in Surrogates? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47571759)

So you could take this and drop yourself into a robot remotely. If the robot was to look like a human or at least dressed like one then you've got your alter-ego ready for primetime.

Re:Like in Surrogates? (1)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | about 2 months ago | (#47573139)

Never mind human. Be more creative. You can have the humanform robot for working, then switch to your customised Creature from Outer Space body for partying.

once again, porn drives tech (1)

argStyopa (232550) | about 2 months ago | (#47571781)

Tell me that this doesn't scream for implementation with porn?

LOL ... (1)

gstoddart (321705) | about 2 months ago | (#47571867)

those electrical stimulators mildly shock muscles to force a friend to mirror the user's movements). It's an imperfect system

LOL, what could possibly go wrong?

There's a super(hero|villain) origin story in here waiting to happen.

VR, dodgy electrical shocks, a budding young scientist, a Microsoft product ... quick, someone should sell this to Marvel. =)

Re:LOL ... (1)

perryizgr8 (1370173) | about 2 months ago | (#47572469)

those electrical stimulators mildly shock muscles to force a friend to mirror the user's movements). It's an imperfect system

LOL, what could possibly go wrong?

There's a super(hero|villain) origin story in here waiting to happen.

VR, dodgy electrical shocks, a budding young scientist, a Microsoft product and Facebook... quick, someone should sell this to Marvel. =)

you forgot :P

So I can know how it's like to be a White Devil? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47571917)

Hey, I want to be a White Devil and oppress the 3rd world with capitalism!

Where have I heard this before? (3, Interesting)

sootman (158191) | about 2 months ago | (#47572059)

You want to go skiing without leaving your den, you can. But I'm assuming a guy like you, you wanna go skiing you fly to Aspen. That's not what you're interested in here. It's about the stuff you can't have... right? The forbidden fruit... see that guy, with the drop-dead Philipino girlfriend? Wouldn't you like to be that guy for twenty minutes? The right twenty minutes? ... You want to be a girl... see what that feels like? ... It's all doable.

- Lenny, Strange Days [imdb.com]

Re:Where have I heard this before? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47573659)

That's a great movie.

Wrong! Bzzt! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47572231)

Again!

Mel (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47572541)

See for example:
http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-18017745

Easy (1)

nospam007 (722110) | about 2 months ago | (#47572935)

"... the body they see does the same (those electrical stimulators mildly shock muscles to force a friend to mirror the user's movements). It's an imperfect system, but a fascinating example of the power of virtual reality. What else might we use VR systems for?"

Are you kidding? Brainwashing!

My guess is strapping somebody on a bench with an OR and giving him violent electroshocks to the testicles each time they see a Qur'an or a half-moon in their virtual reality and an electric orgasm if they see ham and ribs, is the first thing SOME people are going to do.

Forever Peace (1)

barlevg (2111272) | about 2 months ago | (#47573423)

VR control of robots (and body swapping/mind-sharing with other humans) is the central premise of Joe Haldeman's Forever Peace [wikipedia.org] . Definitely a novel worth reading.

MIT professor (1)

peter303 (12292) | about 2 months ago | (#47574465)

I was suprised to find out Joe is a professor of writing at MIT. But he wrote manyof novels before joining MIT.

telepresence delusion known for decades (1)

peter303 (12292) | about 2 months ago | (#47574457)

By operators of factory/medical robots and drones. You start to feel you are actually there. It will get so much better with the new Oculus

Imagine the Possibilities (1)

LifesABeach (234436) | about 2 months ago | (#47574523)

1. At GITMO.

2. Another remake of the "Body Snatchers?"

Computer Implant Take Over (1)

pubwvj (1045960) | about 2 months ago | (#47575371)

What if one of the users is a computer AI. It takes over the body of the other by providing those stimulations that force the user to move their body. Now the computer has a body. Rather than a simulation it is possession and possession is 9/10ths of the law...

Simsense (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47575623)

One step closer to full blown simsense rigs. Yes!!

I see where this is heading... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47578385)

This reminds me of the sci fi flick Gamer in which kids control the bodies of death row inmates as if they were characters in an FPS game:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1034032/

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?