If that’s what you’ve taken from this thread, I’d suggest you probably didn’t read it closely.
You asked for our advice. We have given it to you. I have successfully funded through VC before, so I can attest that my advice, while brief, was based in reality. You choose to respond as if we are attacking your mental health. This of course brings into question your mental health. May I suggest that you step away and re-read the thread in a few days? There is useful information here, if you choose to read it.
And some of it is great as judged by the general population. These types of mental conditions tend to be more common among successful artists and creative types than the average population, so I don’t think you can discount the product based on a label attached to the person.
We really need to see his work to be able to judge it.
squish7: I don’t see any PM’s. You said you wanted people to see your work and you haven’t posted any links in this thread and you didn’t PM me. Are you going to post an example or not?
In the past he has discussed his work on new rules for playing with frisbees. (And fighting off 70 orcs.)
Unfortunately, you’re wrong. There’s a vast difference between reality and a simulation of reality.
You may spend a few weeks “traveling” in your XR spaceship. But when you step outside, you’ll still be on Earth. Simulations are not reality. Science fiction is not science.
And while we’re on that subject, The Matrix was a movie. A work of fiction. It does not represent a real situation. There is no gateway to the Matrix because it doesn’t exist.
I agree with this. I’m an engineer that works in the field of simulation and training systems, and while I’ve never worked a program that utilized VR/AR/XR/whatever, part of my job involves keeping abreast of the latest developments in the industry, and I know a lot of big players are heavily involved in this area on the Government/DoD side. AR goggles and gloves with haptic feedback and tracking in 3D space are things I’ve seen being demonstrated in person. Just because something hasn’t been released in the commercial space doesn’t mean somebody, somewhere isn’t working (and patenting) it. I strongly suggest doing a patent search before approaching anybody to see if your idea isn’t already being worked on by someone.
This post is essentially the excercise in you arguing that because you think you are special people must listen to you.
The world does not work that way.
If you wish to achieve something rather than making grandious claims about your brain chemisty and specialness, and tying this to the achievements of others, you must learn to communicate in an organized way and to master the processes of the business field you wish to engage with.
It is not up to anyone else to meet you half way in this type of activity.
This by the way is an aspect of your personalization of feedback that has not one think to do with negativety about any brain chemistry and everything about your mode of presentation and your mode of communication - which is full of the special pleading, the grandiose assertios and a thin skinned reaction to anything that is not framed as praise.
You are using this as a crutch, an excuse. You will not make progress unless you recognize that. It seems unlikely you will, but that is the reality.
Biggest mistake people make in thinking they can be inventors;
“I have this great idea! I’ll give it to you, you figure out how to make it happen and we’ll split the profits!”
Everyone has ideas. Ideas mean nothing if you can’t make them happen. The money is never in the base idea. The money is in turning it into a real, marketable product.
Actually, I’d be interested to know what happened to your cancer cure from the previous thread. The one that had a ton of Harvard(?) professors interested.
Also, your special revolutionary movie technique involving fractals(?) that will change the course of filmmaking.
Updates please?
QFT
When I was working for a manufacturer, the problem was never a lack of ideas. The problem was always the shortage of talented engineers and programs.
Unless, of course, you become a patent troll. Then the money really is in the idea.
Just patent your idea and then don’t tell anybody about it. (Patents are technically public, but if you write them in impenetrable legalese it will be very difficult for a real inventor, especially if that’s a private individual rather than a large company, to find out about your patent.) Wait for someone else to independently come up with the same idea (or something vaguely related to it – that’s another advantage of making your patent as vague and unreadable as possible) and actually do all the hard work of turning it into a product. Once their investment is a huge sunk cost for them, you have them by the balls.
The main downside of this approach is that after you die, your soul will go to Hell. But if you have no conscience, it can be very profitable.
See post #74. He should not do this.
Going to conferences on this subject and looking at the exhibit floor, going to talks, and chatting with people is a much better way of finding out what is going on,
One big pothole with this plan… as well as squish7’s overall “plan”… is that no VC is dumb enough to sign an NDA prior to final diligence. They don’t need to (they have the $$$) and they would encumber future opportunities for themselves. Even big companies are reluctant to sign an NDA prior to their believing there is something substantial that they want to see under the hood.
I work at a biotech company and get calls every day from big, deep thinkers with out of the box ideas such as these from the last week:
- a German microbrewery who wanted to engineer yeast to get rid of those “pesky and nasty” terpenoid/isoprenoid tones in IPAs as “IPAs are finally fading now that everyone knows how bad they really are.” But as this would be in germany, no GMOs can be used. Good luck with that… in 10 different ways!
- oat milk that has been fully homogenized and foams good enough for coffee creaming… but no biotechnology can be used due to consumer concerns. Why are you calling me?
So squish7, you need to just put your ideas out there. Let the market decide if they and you have any value. If you want to show how awesome your ideas are, come back in a year with your results and prove us wrong.
So spend a lot of time and money to develop an idea only “To be squashed like the cockroach you are.” - Kevin O’Leary, Shark Tank when someone comes after you for patent infringement which will eliminate any chance of your getting into the door with anyone again.
If I were the OP, I wouldn’t bother showing any other work unless it’s actually made money. Show us the green.
Showing brilliant, but undeveloped ideas in more than one field is actually a red flag.
If I understood the OP, the person can’t actually implement the technology but just has an idea for a new application.
Or has an idea of what could be invented but doesn’t have the technical ability to actually invent it himself.
What is that joke about all the brilliant thinkers could solve the world’s problems but they are too busy driving taxis? I guess they’ve all migrated to Uber now.
After spending more than 50 years hearing how my brother’s latest idea will revolutionize whatever field he’s thinking of this week, I’m more certain that the OP will not listen to what he doesn’t want to hear than any confidence in the sun rising tomorrow.
My old Uncle Bob had more inventions than you could shake a stick at. He died at 80+, never sold the first thing. He had a company interested in a revolutionary fishing reel that wouldn’t tangle the line. Nope. They sent someone out to look at it, of course it didn’t work. Not just no tangles, it wouldn’t cast at all. Big. Failure. He blamed the guy, not his reel. He never was a happy man. OP be a happy man. Get a regular job, stay on your meds. Maybe write sci-fi as a hobby. Just saying.
Sorry, just saying what our patent attorneys told us. This was true in multiple large Silicon Valley companies.
In any case, if someone sees an issued patent, they are way behind since patents take years and you had better have a new product out there long before that. So using networking to find the true state of the art is a lot more important.
Like I said, few people are going to sue until someone has enough money to make it worthwhile. I have experience in this with the potential suer side (we had a smoking gun) not the being sued side.
When I first looked at your quote I thought you were saying the Shark Tank people did patent searches. I was surprised they would be that clueless, but I figured out it was just a cute insult to the inventor.
Yeah, you’re right. One doesn’t need an NDA because if it got out that the VCs were stealing ideas, there business would be toast. Same is true for agents.
LMAO. (Actually, I’ve previously dabbled a bit thinking what “RR” could mean or be used for!)
I wasn’t talking about you/everyone. I apologize for responding in such a general way in my last post. I was on my phone and didn’t have time to quote people. I’ll try to be clearer in the future.
I tried to send you a message but my connection was screwy and didn’t send it and I forgot to go back and re-write it. (Sorry.) I’ll have something posted about my work in this thread within 12 hours, promise.
Let’s drop this point please; this is spiraling into a deadlocked if-a-tree-falls-in-the-woods debate. Plenty of reputable philosophers agree with me that when a reality-simulation has reached 100% perfection, it has replaced reality itself. You can disagree if you want, but this isn’t the thread to go off on a dead-horse topic.
People, can we please drop this point? If there was the slightest purpose in pointing out this obvious fact out, it’s long gone. Maybe just forget I ever said the word “idea”. Pretend I said “implementation” or “solution” or “application” or something.
Fenris, why do you choose a nasty, childish, defaming tone here? How is that productive other than making me feel bad and you feel good? Just fyi, if you see an EASY opportunity to take a sarcastic stab at me, it may be too good to be true. For instance, here you reference “cancer cure”. You’re yanking a term utterly out of context because you see an easy way to stab at me. The structural context regarding that term when something like this:
squish7: Won’t a tie-in to a useful invention add value to my movie idea?
SD poster: no
squish7: How can that be? What if I had a cure for cancer? That wouldn’t help raise interest for my movie?
The “cancer cure” was a metaphor in discussion. You’ve warped things where it makes me look bad to someone who doesn’t know the context, like I was on the board delusionally ranting that I had a cure for cancer. Not fair of you.
Like I said I’ll post something of mine in this thread within 12 hours.
Thanks everyone for your feedback so far!
I find it weird that you have no network. You apparently went to school, and supposedly you’re insanely creative. I’ve been studying and working on various projects for a bit over a decade now and while I don’t have a bunch of “industry” giants slurping up my stuff by the spoonful, I’ve never been short of people to bounce ideas off, who I can ask for help, who approaches me for help or asks me if I’m interested in doing something with or for them.
As an aside, there is a field where the idea is front and center, conceptual art. Good luck making big bucks off of it, though. And of course, while the idea(s) can be the meat of it, the presentation and contextualization of said idea is just as important, and don’t take this the wrong way, but the impression you’ve given me is that you have a lot to work on in both departments.
A big red flag is when one idea arbitrarily connects to another, then a third, then a fourth, without any seeming relation. Your screenplay-whatever is a prime example. Free running, an undefined screenplay for a Hollywood blockbuster, your own music, fractal art, some kind of invention etc. The only thing connecting all these separate things is you wanting to do them all. That’s not the way to build an inter-disciplinary conceptual artwork spanning many different media. Find the concept first, simple or complex, then explore methods and various media that furthers and adds to that core concept, resulting in a broader whole. The throw-stuff-in-a-blender method only works if it is actually done consciously, for a reason, and it requires quite a lot of finesse, or just utter dedication, to pull off.
When it comes to the technical side of things, if you don’t know how and don’t want to pay (a lot!) you either have to know someone who does or interest someone who does enough so that they want to get involved. Otherwise you just have to put in the time and learn it yourself. Also, things don’t necessarily have to be completely new to work as, lets say a tech demo. You could for example hack existing consumer hardware and software to make a proof of concept to interest people enough to want to get involved on the technical side of things. If you have something that actually works, people usually get a lot more interested. 
Anyway, If I were you I’d scrap all the old ideas, take all the notebooks, drawings, word-documents and dump em in the thrash. Then I’d take a proper break, find out what the fuck I want, come up with a simple idea that furthers that a little in some way, realize that idea and then move on. According to yourself, you have no problem coming up with ideas, so why be a hoarder?
Btw: AR/VR parkour as a product sounds really stupid and potentially very dangerous. As a comedic art performance it could potentially work, if you squint your eyes.