Post Virtual Reality Sadness • Hacker News Board

Re: Post Virtual Reality Sadness

#161

Post by dahdum » Thu, Nov 17, 2016, 12:23 AM UTC

pYQAJ6Zm wrote: post #144

dahdum wrote: post #59

Having spent many hours in VR (Vive Room Scale) at a stretch, the article rings true to me. The biggest surprise being that it might not feel perfectly real at the time, but the memory is much closer. The next generation of pixel density will make a huge difference IMO. I can comfortably work in VR with multiple desktops, but the resolution is tad too low.

>I can comfortably work in VR with multiple desktops, but the resolution is tad too low. I am interested in this. Can you, say, write code or read text for long hours, without having to upsize the text too much?

You've got to up the text size or shorten the distance in VR to be comfortable, which is the annoying part I think will be solved in the next gen.

I get around this by adding multiple emulated displays (using Headless Ghost / Compulab Emulator) that are visible only in VR. Gives more room for window placement.

I'm used to working with 2-6 monitors on the desktop so it's natural for me to extend that into VR, but some people don't like the head movement needed.

Re: Post Virtual Reality Sadness

#162

Post by inimino » Thu, Nov 17, 2016, 7:17 AM UTC

lomnakkus wrote: post #159

inimino wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The argument is that you are likely to be in a simulation, because most minds will be simulated minds. The precondition of most minds being simulated is massive computing power. If we can run a simulation but it requires half the world's computational resources and simulates one second per century of real time, then obviously most minds (and most moments of lived experience) would not be simulated.

> The precondition of most minds being simulated is massive computing power. How so? I'm still not following the logic here. AFACS it does not matter how fast anything runs -- a simulation always proceeds a tick at a time. The simulated reality cannot (almost by definition) observe time at a smaller time scale.

The key point is most minds.

The argument is that as a conscious being, your prior expectation of "where you are" should be a uniform distribution over all conscious beings. So the idea that you are "probably" in a simulation relies on the assumption that there will be more conscious beings inside simulations than in the top-level "real" universe.

Re: Post Virtual Reality Sadness

#163

Post by lomnakkus » Sat, Nov 19, 2016, 8:33 PM UTC

inimino wrote: post #162

lomnakkus wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The precondition of most minds being simulated is massive computing power. How so? I'm still not following the logic here. AFACS it does not matter how fast anything runs -- a simulation always proceeds a tick at a time. The simulated reality cannot (almost by definition) observe time at a smaller time scale.

The key point is most minds. The argument is that as a conscious being, your prior expectation of "where you are" should be a uniform distribution over all conscious beings. So the idea that you are "probably" in a simulation relies on the assumption that there will be more conscious beings inside simulations than in the top-level "real" universe.

> So the idea that you are "probably" in a simulation relies on the assumption that there will be more conscious beings inside simulations than in the top-level "real" universe.

I mean I can sort-of-see-it if this is the assumption, but the assumption itself seems quite circular to me.

EDIT: I also don't understand how this is connected to my point about speed-of-simulation, but...