Agreed, if they had a real device I'm sure the video would have been shot in a different way than. This is simply an animation of what it could look like, but I highly doubt it actually exists. Otherwise why have a computer animated hand do the actions, instead of a real one.
Or is this the new strategy, let's show something that looks like a fake when actually we have it.
Any advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo.
Yeah, especially if you end up not actually building the product as it was in the video.
> Showing a “fake” video is powerful for sharing a vision and testing if there is a need for a solution. On the other hand, if the video is too ambitious, people will take it as a norm and will base their expectations on the video. If the real product doesn’t match the video afterward, they will probably be unsatisfied because the product is incomplete.
> This thing happened to me when I had a call with a user during beta testing. She expected that the complete product should work as it was on the video.
On one hand, it's nice to be able to gauge the interest of something before going ahead and building it, but it is borderline fraud if you show something that is not the real thing, and launch something that doesn't work the same way. That's just selling smoke and mirrors.
I'm rather skeptic. No real-life videos, only unrealistic concepts. The bold "there's nothing like this being build" statements and then they use off the shelf components.
Sounds like a great recipe for disappointment. They should have at least posted a real-life video (or a realistic rendition).
The fake video looks totally wrong to me. It looks like the audio is out of sync with the video. It's amazing technology, but it doesn't seem likely to totally fool anyone yet.
Infuriating to see such a garbage video for a very promising technology. Either it is beyond fake, or they are just hiding the fact the tech they are working on doesn't work.
I mean it's pretty classic trick to mix in real stuff with fake stuff. This video was probably really, but one of the videos in question is apparently fake.
Look at "realistic" photos , it is easy for someone with experience to spot issues, the hangs/fingers are wrong, shadows and light are wrong, hair is weird, eyes have issues. In a video there are much more information so much more places to get things wrong, making it pass this kind of test will be a huge job so many will not put the effort.
So even the video doesn't explain this? Well that was unexpected. I really really find it odd that people that can engineer something like this don't even want to show a little bit of the magic they created? Sounds like snake-oil to me then.. even if it's not, that's how it looks.
This is endemic to public product demos. The thing never works as it does in the video. I'm not excusing it, I'm saying: don't trust public product demos. They are commercials, they exist to sell to you, not to document objectively and accurately, and they will always lie and mislead within the limits of the law.
This is actually one of the reasons I believe some foreign web commerce sites tend to do so well. There's a culture of filming everything. Film the product being made. Film the completed product in packaging. Film the completed product interacting with its environment and humans. Really adds to the "this product is real, and not a scam." Much larger barrier for falsification.
They specifically act in a way to rule out fakes. For example they turn the magnet around to show that there are no small wires connecting the edges. They start and stop many times, they move in different directions. They knew the video would be watched with the default mind set that it is fake.
reply