151–160 of 368 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes. It is worth the sacrifice. Tell your friends to send you an SMS invite to birthdays.
Hah. Like that would ever happen. I have a friend who refuses to use Facebook. About twice a year I remember to send her updates. Then when I see her I have to go over all the updates everyone else already saw on Facebook. I literally pull out my phone and show her my feed. It’s really frustrating and inefficient. I only do it because she’s a really good friend.
>"at some point in the 2020s, we will get breakthrough augmented reality glasses that will redefine our relationship with technology." Constant video surveillance, direct-to-eyes on-glass advertising, targeted advertising beamed on every approved spot, interests profiling via retina movements/focus and God knows what else will undoubtedly come about if AR glasses become "cool" and ubiquitous like mobile phones. Maybe…
Huh, I just want my heads up life display because...why not? Maybe I won’t trust Facebook to give it to me, but if the tech becomes good enough, I’m definitely going to embrace it. Is it really a dystopian future? We’ve adjusted to the telegraph, camera, telephone, radio, TV, cell phone, smart phone and...why are AR glasses going to be the tech to bring society down?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What app are you using?
Mostly BoxVR but with some BeatSaber mixed in. BoxVR is super effective once you’ve learned its quirks and really commit to shadow kick boxing (putting a lot of force into your punches). BeatSaber is more fun and less of a grind, but its lack of a fitness mode means you fall out of zone too much inside and between songs. I want to try some more games with fitness potential like PistolWhip, and I’m still hoping for so…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It seems highly likely 5-10 years from now you will be able to wear a device that is comfortable and unobtrusive that can deliver the presence of any other connected user to you instantly, including body language and full spatial awareness. In such a world where these devices exist, it would be pretty stunning to think people would not use them regularly for such purposes.
There are a few things that make it less convenient. One of them like you pointed out is the size and comfort issues but there are other issues. VR/AR chats require your full attention / real time communication. Most communication has left phone calls and moved to asynchronous communication methods. Another is limitations of the space, people spend a large % of there communication time on public transport, instant me…
Besides, the idea is not that this would meaningfully displace existing media (except perhaps video for some use-cases), but provide a fundamentally new medium for communication that has no present day analog other than face-to-face. Much like current tools, you'd use it when it is the ideal context and situation for it to be maximally useful.
Video calls and other media have distinct tradeoffs, and are objectively worse than face-to-face along a variety of dimensions.
The argument is simple, if you believe:
- people value face-to-face over existing digital communication tools for certain contexts
- VR and AR based communication meaningfully approaches face-to-face in certain ways that existing tools do not
- VR and AR technology will eventually get to a point where it is ubiquitous
Then it seems that tech will be used for those purposes. Either of the latter two assumptions could be wrong, but early research [1] supports the argument of first, and based upon the tech track the second seems highly likely.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes. It is worth the sacrifice. Tell your friends to send you an SMS invite to birthdays.
Hah. Like that would ever happen. I have a friend who refuses to use Facebook. About twice a year I remember to send her updates. Then when I see her I have to go over all the updates everyone else already saw on Facebook. I literally pull out my phone and show her my feed. It’s really frustrating and inefficient. I only do it because she’s a really good friend.
Yeesh. I'm glad my friends don't regard me this way. IMHO, your comment is a perfect example of why one should quit Facebook.
>"at some point in the 2020s, we will get breakthrough augmented reality glasses that will redefine our relationship with technology." Constant video surveillance, direct-to-eyes on-glass advertising, targeted advertising beamed on every approved spot, interests profiling via retina movements/focus and God knows what else will undoubtedly come about if AR glasses become "cool" and ubiquitous like mobile phones. Maybe…
Ah, you mean this future: Keiichi Matsuda http://hyper-reality.co/ (or https://youtube.com/watch?v=YJg02ivYzSs )
I still don't understand how the one of the most intelligent minds in Silicon Valley work for Facebook to make sure people click ads. Can they work on real problems like the ones Bill Gates foundation is working on? No, non-profitable enough
Facebook makes money. The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative spends money. Microsoft makes money. The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation spends money. It's a bit strange to compare Mark Zuckerberg's money making organization to Bill Gate's money spending organization.
Pretty much all the research I've heard about social media indicates that it makes the world worse. So I think it is relevant.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That’s true today. Is it true 10 years from today? If AR/VR becomes built into a form factor similar to reading glasses today I suspect we will see a lot more avatar based chatting.
For what purpose though? Front facing cameras are in every device now and IM/voice chat is still more common. I guess it depends if you are communicating for function or for social/entertainment purposes. I just don't see the added value of avatar communication other than the novelty of being a video game character or a fox person
- social presence: the feeling of being together and of unmediated communication
- shared spatial awareness: the ability to have a shared reference frame of physical reality
these are the two key features of face to face communication that digital communication tools have largely failed to replicate. (as studied by academic research)
I also conjecture there's a third:
- ability to dynamically spawn and manipulate contextual mixed media in a shared spatial environment (videos, images, 3d models, data, etc)
These three characteristics combined are met already today to some degree by modern day video games, but VR/AR seems likely to be the key tool to knock down much of the barrier regarding social presence due to its ability to transmit many more forms of non-verbal communication between people than existing tools.
I think Zuck is too full of himself. People often get confused that their success means that they are wise, and that we should listen to them. Should we as well follow the thought leadership of drug cartels and the Saudi monarchs?