Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Oculus Says They Didn't Expect Such Negative Reactions to Selling to Facebook

thesurge.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 229 posts

Re: Oculus Says They Didn't Expect Such Negative Reactions to Selling to Facebook

#161

Post by deletes »

sillysaurus3 wrote: post #159
deletes wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't know that, they might as well changed their opinion and are now too embarrassed to speak about it. I think a lot of people were acting with pure emotion. Once the surprise subsides the logical reasoning kicks in and you get the bigger picture.

they might as well changed their opinion and are now too embarrassed to speak about it. Do people do this? It seems like people who change their opinion are also vocal about it.

Note the phrase might as well. The example was a stab at how you can't make such assumptions.

Re: Oculus Says They Didn't Expect Such Negative Reactions to Selling to Facebook

#162

Post by nightski »

bane wrote: post #150
loup-vaillant wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But to be honest, if somebody waived $2b in my face I'd take it and skip off to a comfortable retirement in Malta without giving two shits about the community that supported it in the beginning. Would you? Really? It is my understanding the Oculus folks were working on that partly for fun, partly because they have a purpose (the purpose being "VR gaming would be soo cool!"). Their idea of a "comfortable retirement"…

Absolutely. I wouldn't even look back. I have plenty of other things to occupy my time that isn't work. Painting, writing, photography, music, and the list goes on forever. Freed of the daily grind I would nothing but things I expect no return on simply for the pleasure of it. I'd probably even give away the output of those activities for nothing.

Wow I am sorry that you enjoy your life's work so little. Maybe you should do something about that? I couldn't imagine a life where I was not stoked to do what I do every day.

Re: Oculus Says They Didn't Expect Such Negative Reactions to Selling to Facebook

#163

Post by rfrey »

nightski wrote: post #162
bane wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absolutely. I wouldn't even look back. I have plenty of other things to occupy my time that isn't work. Painting, writing, photography, music, and the list goes on forever. Freed of the daily grind I would nothing but things I expect no return on simply for the pleasure of it. I'd probably even give away the output of those activities for nothing.

Wow I am sorry that you enjoy your life's work so little. Maybe you should do something about that? I couldn't imagine a life where I was not stoked to do what I do every day.

Wow, I am sorry that your interests are so narrow. Maybe you should do something about that? I couldn't imagine a life where there was only one thing available that would fulfill me.

Re: Oculus Says They Didn't Expect Such Negative Reactions to Selling to Facebook

#164

Post by freshyill »

dragontamer wrote: post #37
Geee wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't you see it? Facebook can't currently monetize face-to-face interactions, but in virtual reality they can. The purchase makes a lot of sense for Facebook. Facebook's business model is to monetize human interactions. Today, most of human interaction happens over the Internet (with messages and images), and in the future, it will happen in virtual environments. VR will be the ultimate platform, and Facebook wants…

This is what people fear from Facebook. Selling out to Microsoft or Sony would have been "monetize by making awesome games". Selling out to Facebook means virtual reality ads will penetrate everywhere you walk.

Just like on Instagram! Wait.

Re: Oculus Says They Didn't Expect Such Negative Reactions to Selling to Facebook

#166

Post by XorNot »

albeec13 wrote: post #145
threeseed wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Facebook doesn't know how to make and sell a product that isn't their own users And how is this any different to Google ? They have exactly the same business model as Facebook.

My initial reaction was to ask why you brought Google into this conversation. Upon further thought, while Google does have a similar business model to Facebook, they have also built actual products and sold them directly to consumers, which Facebook has not. They also build an operating system, Android, used by the majority of smart phones sold worldwide. So no, they're not quite the same, but ignoring that, why brin…

Because Google used to be just a search engine. Seriously, is the idea that "things change with time" so alien to the HN audience?

Re: Oculus Says They Didn't Expect Such Negative Reactions to Selling to Facebook

#167

Post by logicallee »

threeseed wrote: post #129
vezzy-fnord wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All of FB's past acquisitions before Oculus (just Instagram and WhatsApp) were social media platforms, precisely what FB specialized in and knows how to work with. They don't need to do any radical shift with them, they already serve as private data and analytics incubators. Oculus is a completely unrelated avenue for them, and one can only wonder what their intentions are. Zuckerberg already made a PR statement that…

But what makes Facebook different to what Google was a few years ago ? Google has been a long time advertising player that only recently got into hardware.

>But what makes Facebook different to what Google was a few years ago ?

Mark Zuckerberg.

Re: Oculus Says They Didn't Expect Such Negative Reactions to Selling to Facebook

#168

Post by mikeash »

nightski wrote: post #162
bane wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absolutely. I wouldn't even look back. I have plenty of other things to occupy my time that isn't work. Painting, writing, photography, music, and the list goes on forever. Freed of the daily grind I would nothing but things I expect no return on simply for the pleasure of it. I'd probably even give away the output of those activities for nothing.

Wow I am sorry that you enjoy your life's work so little. Maybe you should do something about that? I couldn't imagine a life where I was not stoked to do what I do every day.

I'd rather be stoked to do what I do every day and have $2 billion in the bank than be stoked but not have a massive pile of cash.

It's not as if there's only one thing in life that I could possibly enjoy.

Re: Oculus Says They Didn't Expect Such Negative Reactions to Selling to Facebook

#169

Post by honestcoyote »

threeseed wrote: post #121
teacup50 wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> _Someone_ is going to create a Google Hangouts-style product that incorporates VR. Are they? Why is VR inevitable? We already went through this once in the 90s, and the same truths are still true: nobody wants to put a face-covering headset just to communicate with other people.

You could say the same thing about computers. Nobody wants to sit in front of a screen just to communicate with other people. Yet billions of people do. Up until now the technology simply hasn't been good enough to address the "presence" issue.

Sitting in front of a screen doesn't completely block your vision. I think there will be a certain level of discomfort, no matter how lightweight the goggles, at being completely blind to your surroundings. I have no idea if this will prevent mainstream acceptance of the technology, but I think it will have a serious effect.

Maybe the next generation of this tech will find a way to preserve peripheral vision, and/or provide some pass-through motion detection, while still remaining immersive.

Re: Oculus Says They Didn't Expect Such Negative Reactions to Selling to Facebook

#170

Post by XorNot »

pfraze wrote: post #77
wiremine wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The reason people don't get this -- or at least, why I don't get it -- and thus responded negatively, is because VR should have nothing to do with Facebook's vision, and Facebook -- or social gaming in general -- should have nothing to do with Oculus' vision. Honest question: why shouldn't VR be in Facebook's vision? _Someone_ is going to create a Google Hangouts-style product that incorporates VR. I'm not excited…

It's not that VR shouldn't be in Facebook's vision. It's that Facebook's vision shouldn't be a primary player in VR.

Why?
Post reply on HN