That link asks me to download something or something.
Edit: Now I see it. YES EXACTLY. I WANNA INTERACT WITH THAT.
I edited the post with a GIF
1 Like
Awesome I love it, that’s like exactly sort of what I had in mind. Except what i had in mind was lower resolution, like, sega genisis, but in nice bright LED’s. About 1.5" x 1.5" or 1" x 1".
That, or some sort of fiber optic array of tubes that sticks up out of the desk lmao, or a HOLOGRAM.
It would seem like instead of a QR or bar code of some kind, we require an image communication mechanism. Another way to put it is to use a display surface as a connection point for streaming data. Having two displays on each end of the communication channel would allow for two way communication. Maybe we could come up with a way to beautifully and efficiently emit data on a display much like a system would emit data on a stream interface in a programming language API.
1 Like
Is this just a really fancy way of saying have a display? I’m a bit confused sorry, could you help me out?
Edit: ohohoh ok I think i get it, the emission of data on a stream interface in a programming language, what sort of pattern does that have?
It’s a fancy way of saying define a barcode that isn’t static. But at that point it’s not a single code, but rather it becomes a socket or port that data can pass through.
1 Like
Maybe we could come up with a way to beautifully and efficiently emit data on a display much like a system would emit data on a stream interface in a programming language API.
Is it like, the right ‘rhythm’ of the data emission, that would make it beautiful? Am I getting this?
like running a QR code through an arpeggiator filter on some DAW. 
or running this data emssion you’re talking about, through an arpeggiator.
These look great. Are they documented by any chance? What are the parameters? Particle size, speed, direction, relative position, …? Do they have a higher data capacity per second? How robust are they? Do they work well in different light situations? Do they still scan if there is a bit of dirt on the screen, or on the lens, or scratches, or if the camera is held at an angle?
What is great about matrix QR is that they are open, run on almost any device and are incredibly robust. I don’t think we should give up significant usability and performance for aesthetics. Some minor trade offs seem ok though. If it works great and looks great at the same time, then that is awesome, but I think most users would opt for the fastest and most robust solution after the novelty cools off. Apple watch pairing is something that people are doing rarely. A busy vendor on a crowded marketplace may not appreciate if scanning the codes takes twice as long and fails 20% of times.
1 Like
I really like that input. Thank you.
One thing, and I’m not trying to disagree, but I just wanted to mention because I think it’s relative/funny, is that I really prefer my bitcoin apps have a delay in the QR scan. Cash app for example, is WAYYY too fast.
It’s like scanned before the camera even finishes popping up, and it just seems glitchy and there’s no experience. I basically want the scan to work at a rate somewhere around the time it takes for a human being like me to notice qr code with my eyes and recognize that I’m going to scan it.
This would make the device feel like more of an extension of my brain. Lets call it ‘natural timing’. With natural timing, sometimes you can beat max speed optimization in terms of UX, (and I know you agree there is a possibility, I also don’t mean on a protocol level just fyi, just wanna make that clear, talkin’ about a grin app here basically),
Anyway sometimes the experience in some ways that we deal with objects, data, tech, that is more valuable than the efficiency of whatever tool it is. Think of it this way, if the process of qr scanning works around the rate at which you process what is going on around you, your subconscious can at least pretend that it was you who willed whatever it is on the phone or device to happen, because it at least works at the rate that you think, makes you feel more powerful. If it goes too fast, then you’d know all too well you had nothing to do with that, it was all the smart object.
In rare instances like this, it just feels primal that there should be a second for me to process what’s happening with the money while looking at a pretty fading light. One day my dream will come true.
It’s the experience in some ways that we deal with data, that is more valuable than its efficiency. And I think you agree, I just can’t sleep and wanted to blab.
Edit: so many edits, I suck at writing. Just wanted to say, yeah spot on with the apple analogy.
Edit: See I like the aesthetic of seeing the data being scanned (very cyberpunk), see gif. That’d be cool in AR with that apple watch thing.
2 Likes
1 Like
This is definitely cool technology, but maybe not the sweet spot between aesthetics and functionality that we are looking for, as it is skewed heavily towards aesthetics and takes away functional aspects.
Since the human eye is more sensitive to changes in luminance, or brightness, than chrominance, color changes to the specially encoded optical label will likely go unnoticed. For an imaging sensor, however, chrominance changes are easily distinguishable. By capturing encoded frames at a different rate than what is being displayed by a transmitting device, a recipient device is able to to pick out the underlying matrix for decoding and processing.
In other words, this is obfuscating a single matrix QR code (low bandwidth), specifically making it impossible for humans to read and slower for machines to read.
It may not be fun, but QR codes can be decoded by humans.
As Apple’s invention is designed to trick the human eye, it is difficult to prove inclusion in Apple Watch’s pairing process.
That may be an issue in a crypto context.
The UX issues with wallets scanning too fast for the user to follow, could be trivially solved by adding a fixed artificial delay or requiring a minimum fixed time to display the scanner. Using a slow scanning method multiplies the time that it takes to scan a code. I think that scanning a code should not take longer than 2-3 seconds as it can get uncomfortable to hold a device steady longer. It probably also should take at least one second, so the user can actually see it, but animated codes generally take time to scan, while for a static QR code a single frame is sufficient.