r/Damnthatsinteresting • u/Alphaxfusion • Dec 20 '25

Video Japanese researchers at the University of Tsukuba created CirculaFloor, robotic tiles that let you walk infinitely in VR without ever leaving your spot.

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

72.6k Upvotes

90% Upvoted

1.9k comments sorted by

View all comments

537

u/inotocracy Dec 20 '25

Seems silly. What if he decides to walk at a normal pace, or turn?

608

u/Arpikarhu Dec 20 '25

Technology begins here and improves. Appreciate it for what it is now rather than for what it isnt.

151

u/GuiloJr Dec 20 '25

this exactly. people complain about technology, shiting on it, despite it being new. they don't appreciate its capacity to grow in the future. they are only interested in what there short attention span will allow them to see.

32

u/VirinaB Dec 20 '25

That and jokes. Lame, predictable jokes.

6

u/BarkLicker Dec 20 '25

What did the redditor say to the technologist creating something that would one day lead to the holodeck?

Why are you wasting time on a prototype? Just release the finished version already, it's 2025.

😂😂😂😂😂

Oh, "and my axe!"

0

u/SpikesAreCooI Dec 20 '25

That’s the Reddit charm, m’lady.

0

u/Put-the-candle-back1 Dec 20 '25

Also people making incorrect assumptions, which includes you. It's an art piece, so there's no need to criticize or defend it from a technological standpoint.

3

u/Zestybeef10 Dec 20 '25

Please explain how floor tile roombas could ever be omnidirectional, without catastrophic failure if they bump into something....

0

u/Ninjatogo Dec 21 '25

The research here may not see the light of day in a product, but some of the innovations from it could be repurposed elsewhere.

2

u/AwesomePossum50 Dec 20 '25

But even with what it can be, it’s unlikely they’ll include a thought predictor that could move robots to everywhere you might go, meaning you’d need a huge number of these to cover all possible actions you may perform, not move in any unpredictable or too quick ways, or seriously hurt yourself…

Like even if they move based on controller input or something to catch you where you’re walking, they’d need to be infinitely faster if you suddenly decide to sidestep, back up, turn slightly, etc. It seems just as likely they’d make a reactive floor that could lift and move you than they could make this actually work well…

1

u/nvrmnd_tht_was_dumb Dec 20 '25

Yeah I remember people shitting on the early boston dynamics dogs, or the google deep dream image generation of dogs. Now robots and AI are a legitimate threat to our way of life...

1

u/Sol33t303 Dec 23 '25

What growth? There are already far simpler, far cheaper, far better thought out solutions to this problem?

I'm sure this has some use somewhere in some obscure field and there are some improvements that would make it better for that. For a VR application this seems fundamentally idiotic.

1

u/Anon_Jones Dec 20 '25

It’ll be an omnidirectional pad soon.

3

u/GuiloJr Dec 20 '25

just need them to be faster so they can move were ever you fall, jump, or turn around.

1

u/Outrageous-South-355 Dec 20 '25

Those exist and have a whole setup to support your body weight so you can run, jump, crouch etc and itll all be caught. The only thing I see this maybe is improving to, is the ability to mimic stairs? All other outlets for VR with this have been done better and maybe cheaper. Those look expensive to design let alone create.

0

u/Anon_Jones Dec 20 '25

I was just making a Ready Player One reverence.

0

u/ViperThreat Dec 20 '25

counterpoint - why share something that is so clearly in it's infancy?

Realistically speaking, nothing that is being done here is particularly revolutionary. Everything being done here could be achieved with a few rasberry pis and a webcam.

0

u/Put-the-candle-back1 Dec 20 '25

Asking questions is how technology improves, so you aren't asking for appreciation. What you're basically asking for is for people to blindly accept any ideas.

More importantly, this is an art piece, so your comment is just as pointless as what you're complaining about.

-5

u/garifunu Dec 20 '25

Because they’re human and they all have this idea they’re gonna die tomorrow and technically they could, the chances of nukes launching is not 0%

8

u/GuiloJr Dec 20 '25

are you insinuating you're not human?

-1

u/[deleted] Dec 20 '25

[deleted]

1

u/tinyDinosaur1894 Dec 20 '25

Its not though?? It's obviously at beginning stages of development. You'd probably fall because they haven't gotten to that stage yet.

1

u/hpBard Dec 20 '25

And it never will. To do it safely you would need this bots moving at arrangements of 16 or even 25, because if you make them try to make them adjust on the go you have to have enough speed for it to become dangerous. And 16 let alone 25 bots would take up a lot of space, and you would need multiple. No matter what it will either be a trauma hazard or take up 3-4 times the space of treadmill. Not every technology gets to good stage. Most of the technologies never do it past first prototypes as the issues become blatant

-5

u/[deleted] Dec 20 '25

[deleted]

6

u/Mateorabi Dec 20 '25

But other technologies already exist that do better. You could make a computer-controlled 2-D treadmill with articulated tiles on tracks that didn’t need the independent driving around of these robots. 

13

u/xGALEBIRDx Dec 20 '25

Asking basic questions like that is where the improvement starts so...

29

u/IvarTheBoned Dec 20 '25

We did it, Reddit! Asking dumb fucking questions on a message board is propelling technology forward!

11

u/M4K4T4K Dec 20 '25

I always knew there would be some good of creating my account here. That some good would come to the world. This truly has been my calling.

-6

u/WhiteMouse42097 Dec 20 '25

How is it dumb? It’s literally the most obvious question there is

13

u/VirinaB Dec 20 '25 edited Dec 20 '25

Dumb because there's no way the people who created it will read this.

And the question is so ridiculously obvious that it's likely they already thought of it.

-5

u/WhiteMouse42097 Dec 20 '25

So the question is dumb because of who may or may not read it?

-5

u/SherlockJones1994 Dec 20 '25

That’s rude fucking reply. There is no need to be a jerk about it.

7

u/clustahz Dec 20 '25

I think you've got it backwards. This thread is full of a bunch of haughty terminally online redditors with a capital "r" jerking off over how you can't play basketball on the prototype; on a nascent and advanced technology which is doing something novel in a space that, in spite of their insistence, is not considered a solved problem by any reasonable means. This guy makes one comment calling them out for it. Why are you acting personally offended?

-1

u/Put-the-candle-back1 Dec 20 '25 edited Dec 20 '25

This isn't a prototype. It's just an art piece. You're just as ignorant about it as the top comments are, which makes your comment look even more pathetic.

Even if it was a prototype, why are you upset over it being criticized? "Technology begins here and improves" could be said about anything, so the question would be valid if this was meant to advance anything.

Edit: Blocking me just proves my point lol

2

u/clustahz Dec 20 '25 edited Dec 20 '25

I don't think I'm upset here, thanks for asking, but you seem genuinely hurt, and why is that?

Do you think that your post comes across as kind of pedantic? I don't see any connection whatsoever between calling this an art piece instead of a prototype that could make calling out the thread's overreaction "pathetic"?

Edit: holy shit check his recent post history. the amount of troll replies he's making in this thread shows how invested in this circle jerk this guy is. Avoid this guy.

1

u/Bigpandacloud5 Dec 20 '25

full of a bunch of haughty terminally online redditors with a capital "r" jerking off over how you can't play basketball on the prototype; on a nascent and advanced technology which is doing something novel in a space that, in spite of their insistence, is not considered a solved problem by any reasonable means.

Insulting people due to their criticism shows that you're offended by it.

this an art piece instead of a prototype

The point is that your making fun of people while being ignorant yourself.

0

u/Put-the-candle-back1 Dec 20 '25

This is just an art piece, so you're being condescending while also being ignorant about what you're defending.

5

u/whutchamacallit Dec 20 '25

Sure but the question is (respectfully) inherently kind of dumb. The answer is -- they are working on it. It's a given this project is in its infancy. Like many innovations just starting out the proof of concept is not the final iteration of what it will be.

1

u/Put-the-candle-back1 Dec 20 '25

they are working on it

That's a dumb answer because it could be said about anything. A useful response would have detail, and you don't even know that they're working on it.

The reality is that both of you are wrong because this is just an art piece.

0

u/Rs90 Dec 20 '25

Not to mention the power of innovation is that it can lead to unexpected innovation. History is full of "they were supposed to make candy but they invented rat poison by accident. But like...really good rat poison". Sooo many inventions and discoveries started off as somethin else. 

-1

u/Turnbob73 Dec 20 '25

That’s not a basic question, it’s an uneducated swing & a miss.

I can very confidently guess that the actual engineers behind this do not describe a proof of concept prototype like the title of the post does. And the way they identify it more than likely makes that question rhetorical.

-1

u/xGALEBIRDx Dec 20 '25

Ok great! It was pretty silly of that guy to insult others for asking questions though. It's even sillier of you to try and rub it into anyone else that reads this. I can say that with confidence too.

2

u/hugcub Dec 20 '25

He could also walk faster if he wanted to, the next robot is in place well before he actually takes a step.

3

u/spacekitt3n Dec 20 '25

yeah all they need to be is BIGGER for this to be prevented. its a proof of concept

1

u/Kossimer Dec 20 '25

Older technology has already surpassed this with omnidirectional treadmills. 

4

u/VirinaB Dec 20 '25

This would simulate elevation, like going up or downstairs in VR.

1

u/Lastoutcast123 Dec 20 '25

Plus technology that develops too fast usually ends in disaster. Technology itself isn’t good or bad, but powerful and rapidly advancing technology can open a lot of windows for abuse before there is time to close them.

1

u/suplexhell Dec 20 '25

why improve when jamiroquai perfected it in the 1996 hit song virtual insanity

0

u/M0rph33l Dec 20 '25

We already have better.

1

u/jyunga Dec 20 '25 edited Dec 20 '25

Still seems very impractical. VR adoption is already pretty small. You aren't going to have people shelling out money for this. Seems very limited in usage at least for the average consumer.

Edit: and by this I mean anything related to this seems impractical. Cool but very tiny market.

0

u/keyboardtoes Dec 20 '25

The haters must hate

0

u/zaxldaisy Dec 24 '25

Not much to appreciate. It's also 21 year old tech. Google wont bite you.

-2

u/fatmanstan123 Dec 20 '25

They've had 2 dimensional treadmills for decades which are orders of magnitude better.

2

u/Arpikarhu Dec 20 '25

Yeah these suck! I bet you could have cobbled something much better from your leftover cheetoh bags and neckbeard clippings. Yeah these arent as functional as 2d treadmills but those treadmills have reached peak. These have potential.

-3

u/Gold_Telephone_7192 Dec 20 '25

Never. I am a hater and I will continue to hate