meet project primrose, adobe’s real-life interactive dress that changes design every second
id be more excited for this if it wasnt adobe.. fuck adobe
You get the dress but have to subscribe to Dress Cloud for $50/mo and if you decide to discontinue it the dress randomly turns into a 90s era WB shirt and locks itself that way until you re-up
If you subscribe for a whole year it only costs 599$ !
Adobe: Pay $1699 yearly subscription or it will go transparent.
Me, hacking Adobe and cancelling all subscriptions during the oscars: "You're welcome"
That’s a cute dress. If I pirate it, will I get a Creative Cloud warning pop up when it dials home?
Just update your host file so it can't connect to adobe.com
"Hurry up, we're gonna be late for our reservation."
"Hold on, my dress has to install an update!"
I will wait until the gimp version is released
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
They gonna release an ad-supported version to turn you into a walking billboard?
This article desperately needs video.
Here's the official video from Adobe. Bump to 45s into the vid to see the dress in action:
Honestly lol what kind of absurd article doesn't include the video
That video is included in the article, it's just at the very bottom for some reason.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://piped.video/EvGquKkSFMM?si=_yo33O7N6VhFxYQO
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.
pretty impressive, especially these animations.
Thanks... Been seeing the article but didn't even want to bother with reading about it.
The video is pretty damn cool though.
Is it gold or blue I can't tell
NOT AGAIN.
you know you are talking to an engineer when they say
Non-emissive material with reflective light-diffuser modules
instead of "mirrors"
I believe most mirrors can't turn their reflectivity on and off based on an electric current.
I could be totally wrong about mirrors though
You just haven't turned the current high enough.
Still no pockets though.
And you can totally just throw it in the washing machine, right?
Dry clean only of course
It's like the dress Rorschach made his mask from in Watchmen.
I mean... not really... it is auto-sequins.
It's as close as anyone has come so far.
It's in an autosequence.
OMG she's wearing the same dress she wore last week! She just changed the design!
For some reason I’m not super impressed with this. Looks too much like you’re wearing e-ink panels. Call me when these are fully functioning OLEDs that kinetically charge when you walk.
Each one of those scales operates as an independent display, and coordinating them is quite a challenge. I'd be interested in knowing what is driving them, because it's surely not very portable.
I’m sure orchestrating this isn’t super easy (however, if you treat every “display” as a “pixel”, Idk how this coding is different than a woman wearing a dress made of addressable LEDs— on the surface it doesn’t seem super complicated engineering), but it appears as unimpressive.
Reminds me of the book The Diamond Age, where the clothes used nanotech to transform and become waterproof etc.
Or the dress that Rorschach made his mask from.
Hey look its the prototype for Metal Gear Solid.
A changeable dress won't matter, women will buy it, wear it to ONE event and then never wear it again
Women amirite
Women be shoppin - Abraham Lincoln
Can it turn into the face of Nic Cage?
I don't know it sound more like a design for 10 years ago (maybe being kind).
Love this is what we spend our resources on while children go without food, water, electricity, education, and shelter.
You could say the same thing about posting on Lemmy. Or a new game in your favorite RPG series coming out. Or Starbucks' newest coffee flavor. Or any number of other comforts.
This is the "don't be depressed, starving children in Africa have it worse" kind of argument. Please don't.
Magnitude matters, and the resources wasted doing this could have a legitimate impact.
about posting on Lemmy.
Lol. Settle down there and think about why this doesn't make any rational sense.
This is the “don’t be depressed, starving children in Africa have it worse” kind of argument. Please don’t.
No it's not, and you're resorting to analogies because you can't argue against the topic at hand. Please try to stay on topic.
Funny watching people like you defend wasting money on electric dresses while kids go without food, water, electricity, education, and shelter. You're trying to save face because you like contributing to the problem but don't want to admit it.
It's okay, I come across people like you all the time. You're the kind of person who thinks those who have more, deserve more, and those who have less, deserve less.
Despite what the GOP would have you believe, The US and EU have actually achieved post-scarcity, China is close. You should be fighting for post-inequality because that is what is holding back the rest of the world, as well as millions of citizens of the US and EU.
The people who designed this were paid to design this. I presume that at least some of them have children. Therefore, resources spent to invent this did go to give children food, water, shelter, etc.
You're welcome.
My god, go back to lemmygrad.
My internet, please go back to Reddit where your capitalist takes will be supported.