Live data from Hacker News

SimulaVR Has Been Subpoenaed by Meta Platforms, Inc

simulavr.com

441–450 of 478 posts

Re: SimulaVR Has Been Subpoenaed by Meta Platforms, Inc

#441

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes and I’m compelled to rob a gas station because the government has compelled me to pay property taxes /s

This is typical for court cases. Even if a party may have little to do with what’s going on trial, if they’re a relevant party in any way they can get sucked in and be forced to give a deposition. It’s totally possible to “plead the 5th” here, but the rationale here is all the relevant facts to a case have to be brought to light in order to make an informed judgment.

First of all, the 5th amendment only applies to individuals, not entities like corporations. Second, it's main purpose is to not incriminate yourself - sharing business plans is hardly incriminating in itself (unless the business plan is specifically to commit a crime, but that would be dumb... Oh wait).

To me this feels like that Meta is trying to simultaneously measure up the market by making their competitors give out business plans that, frankly, are none of Meta's business, while also tying up smaller companies they feel threatened by in legal battles, as to drain their resources and run them into the ground (or, just a more appealing position where Meta can buy them up). And the latter isn't really new - I mean, Amazon pretty much "fired" mid-level executives and "placed" them at various competitors with the sole task of driving down the valuation of the competitor for easier purchase.

Either way, this kind of abuse of the legal system is disgusting, and even if the subpoena has legitimate reasons, it places an unfair amount of responsibility on an otherwise uninvolved party. The federal government could compel your company to produce an employee who can jump over a 5m wall, that doesn't mean it's suddenly possible.

Re: SimulaVR Has Been Subpoenaed by Meta Platforms, Inc

#442

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>so it's a disengineous point to bring up. It is a perfectly valid point in terms of the impact on SimulaVR which is what this discussion is about. A company is trying to get sensitive information from them. Stating the company is unethical even if all other similar companies are as well is perfectly valid.

How can it be unethical if this is how it's done across the board in the US? Meta's lawyers aren't bringing in some unheard of tactic here. This is par for the course. I'd love to hear some "ethical" means for proving without doubt that you have competitors. Admittedly I wouldn't be a good judge of their usability in court, mind. The other piece that I think the parent was making is that how can we judge this practic…

"To prove we have competitors, we will pull them into a legal battle they otherwise are not a part of, so we can make sure their business plans aren't something that would make them actual competitors in the future"

That's what Meta's subpoena sounds like.

Re: SimulaVR Has Been Subpoenaed by Meta Platforms, Inc

#443

>We're don't view ourselves in competition with Meta >...Meta sells reasonably good gaming headsets to customers who want to be entertained in VR; we're selling general-purpose productivity devices which are aimed at replacing PCs and laptops. Hate to break it to you, but if you don't think that Mark Zuckerberg is actively trying to create VR devices that are general-purpose productivity devices aimed at replacing PC…

We understand Meta sometimes future projects that their devices will have broad office applications, but we're skeptical it has any teeth. Consider that Atari tried to compete with office PCs in the early 80s with their 8-bit family, and failed: https://images.fastcompany.net/image/upload/w_596,c_limit,q_... It's hard to focus on multiple things at once, and we're skeptical that the bureaucratic forces in play at a l…

As someone who used to work there, I would be significantly more afraid.

VR there has never been exclusively about gaming nor has gaming been the overall goal of VR since their acquisition. The way they talked about it back in the day was, if I recall accurately, that they were focused on three pillars: "The metaverse", "The overlay", and "The future of work". Social presence, real-life AR metadata, and expanding the screens and capabilities of working professionals, respectively.

The direction of their research and implementation has, at least to my knowledge, been oriented literally towards creating a new category of general purpose productivity devices and admitting as much in a very public blog post is a pretty big own-goal if the idea is to try to avoid the subpoena by distinguishing yourselves (assuming you're speaking on behalf of SimulaVR).

Re: SimulaVR Has Been Subpoenaed by Meta Platforms, Inc

#444

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Looking at the new videos related to the upcoming Quest Pro that will be announced next week, the simulavr guys are dead wrong. https://www.reddit.com/r/AR_MR_XR/comments/xwjzni/meta_quest...

What you're seeing: a Meta headset tethered to a laptop over WiFi running Immersed. What you're not seeing: a standalone VR headset running a VR Desktop OS natively with bleeding edge pixel density (i.e., like the Simula One). We understand that Meta has some cool tools in its app store which can be used to get a feel for VR computing. But analogously, you could also purchase word processors for early gaming consoles…

If that image is showing what I think it is (because I might have written a part of it if it is), that's not actually tethered.

Re: SimulaVR Has Been Subpoenaed by Meta Platforms, Inc

#445
post #414

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Within deal is above $400 million. Doesn't seem like shelfware money. The end of the article seems pretty consistent with FTC's view: Meta can compete with better hardware and software on it's own.

They do try to build better hardware and software. At this point they are throwing everything they have at it. The FTC are treating them as though it's a big, profitable, won market where Meta isn't playing fair. In reality it's a small, money losing, no winner market where Meta is trying to create something.

This is growth at all costs. Big companies buying up established independent developers to add to their services while consumers have less choice. AB/MS, Figma/Adobe, it needs to stop.

Re: SimulaVR Has Been Subpoenaed by Meta Platforms, Inc

#446
post #384
post #380

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> then it becomes that party's civic duty to cooperate with the courts How is that compatible with the 5th amendment?

The (relevant part of the) 5th amendment does not say "you never have to cooperate with the courts" it says you can not be compelled to incriminate yourself. People and companies are compelled to cooperate with courts all the time - that's literally what a subpoena is.

> it says you can not be compelled to incriminate yourself.

and who decides if you can or cannot incriminate yourself?

Re: SimulaVR Has Been Subpoenaed by Meta Platforms, Inc

#447

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Looking at the new videos related to the upcoming Quest Pro that will be announced next week, the simulavr guys are dead wrong. https://www.reddit.com/r/AR_MR_XR/comments/xwjzni/meta_quest...

What you're seeing: a Meta headset tethered to a laptop over WiFi running Immersed. What you're not seeing: a standalone VR headset running a VR Desktop OS natively with bleeding edge pixel density (i.e., like the Simula One). We understand that Meta has some cool tools in its app store which can be used to get a feel for VR computing. But analogously, you could also purchase word processors for early gaming consoles…

Is it really fair to call 8 bit Atari computer line (on which AtariWriter runs) gaming consoles? They had built-in keyboards, had built-in BASIC, would let you attach peripherals like a disc drive or a printer and let you program in assembly. And could be expanded with RAM expansions and 80 column cards. Of course the later XEGS blurred the line but it's also a bit like suggesting the Amiga or Macintosh were not computers because of the Commodore CD32 and Apple Pippin were a thing.

Re: SimulaVR Has Been Subpoenaed by Meta Platforms, Inc

#448

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Looking at the new videos related to the upcoming Quest Pro that will be announced next week, the simulavr guys are dead wrong. https://www.reddit.com/r/AR_MR_XR/comments/xwjzni/meta_quest...

What you're seeing: a Meta headset tethered to a laptop over WiFi running Immersed. What you're not seeing: a standalone VR headset running a VR Desktop OS natively with bleeding edge pixel density (i.e., like the Simula One). We understand that Meta has some cool tools in its app store which can be used to get a feel for VR computing. But analogously, you could also purchase word processors for early gaming consoles…

> Our view is that dedicated VR computing devices are what the market actually needs.

My view is the market needs a product that does not require an internet connection, Facebook account, Microsoft account, windows PC, or equivalent restriction-ware.

Re: SimulaVR Has Been Subpoenaed by Meta Platforms, Inc

#449

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Isn’t their whole Metaverse thing a gamble to get away from that? Many of us think Meta is trying to gain as much market as they can early, so they can leverage eye tracking and mm wave tech for very invasive biometric collection and ad targeting in the future. Reasonable minds can disagree on that.

Pretty sure Zuck has said outright that the goal is to own the economy of the metaverse… selling digital stuff and digital places with digital ads and (digital?) media. It could be a gambit to track your eyes but that seems even harder with worse reward than taking a 30% cut as the next App Store.

Maybe eye tracking is the fallback plan for when everyone figures out NFTs are the strongest known combination of expensive and valueless.

Re: SimulaVR Has Been Subpoenaed by Meta Platforms, Inc

#450

Maybe I've just been on a too-long coding stretch, but speaking for myself, it's just really unsavory to read so much "red/blue"-style sloganism around the big tech companies. Obviously I'm biased because I worked for one, and so I saw up close the process that produces the decisions that seem to routinely generate comment threads with people comparing Google/FB/MSFT/etc. to e.g. "Satan". It's just not that simple fo…

I think its good for the society as a whole to always view Mega Corps. which have more money than several governments combined with suspicion, Because even when they get punished for their 'shady dealings' the fines are usually a rounding error for their weekly revenue; Meta's recent $400M fine for Instagram not protecting children's data comes to mind.

Public opinion on the brand seem to hold more accountability than the courts for these Mega Corps, After all Facebook did become Meta FWIW.

Post reply on HN