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

Where Will Virtual Reality Take Us?

newyorker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 79 posts

Re: Where Will Virtual Reality Take Us?

#31

Post by crooked-v »

astrange wrote: post #25
atrus wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that's why the initial version is the "Pro" and why it's so so expensive. Laptops/Computers have "text/spreadsheets" as their fundamental unit of usage, phones and tablets have images/videos. So right now we have all this awesome hardware, but we still really haven't found our VisiCalc/Instagram for VR just yet.

The spreadsheets of VR (well, AR) is spreadsheets. The marketing of Vision Pro is literally that you can have a lot of spreadsheets open in the room around you, without being limited by the size of displays you can carry with you. I think this is a better approach than trying to get people to do spreadsheets in the metaverse.

Or to put it another way, the Vision Pro is only a VR device because the AR capabilities they want also allow for VR functionality.

Re: Where Will Virtual Reality Take Us?

#34

Post by sjwhevvvvvsj »

spaceman_2020 wrote: post #32

As a parent of a 6 month old, I really worry about this stuff. I fear that once she is even a little older, this technology will be so good that it will make the real world seem intolerable.

As parent of a 7 year old…you’ll figure it out. We try to avoid an “abstinence only” approach to tech (which doesn’t work once the kid goes to school or a friends house), and be very deliberate about what is allowed and not allowed.

You’ll figure it out, but take the time you have now to discuss with your spouse what your approach is going to be.

Good luck!

Re: Where Will Virtual Reality Take Us?

#35

Post by sjwhevvvvvsj »

ekianjo wrote: post #26
pushfoo wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

TL;DR: People want useful or fun, not "VR" > If they can't sell VR, I don't think anyone can sell VR Imagine having as many monitors as you need. Anywhere. Rearrange them whenever and however, even on airplanes! It all weighs under 1 pound (0.45 kg). How much would you pay? I'd pay at least $600. > where we'll know what people want to use it for/if it's capable of living in the mainstream A cheaper, better multi-moni…

if VR is about having virtual monitors then thats not a Very enticing proposition

With the added benefit of neck strain!

Re: Where Will Virtual Reality Take Us?

#37

Post by ben_w »

xanderlewis wrote: post #22
ben_w wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Crypto mania, AR/VR mania, and Gen AI mania One of the things I will never stop finding weird, is the tendency to group together things that aren't really related. I wonder if I do it too? If I did, I expect I wouldn't notice…

I think you can make a case they’re related; they’re all technologies that have been hyped in much the same way by much the same people. That’s not to say they’ll all end up in the same place, however — it seems already clear to me that ‘Gen AI’ has far more readily-applicable utility than, say, cryptocurrencies. I think you’re just objecting on the basis that AI is obviously already immensely useful while other hype…

> they’re all technologies that have been hyped in much the same way by much the same people.

Really? I can see that for GenAI and Crypto (to my mild annoyance because I was doing GenAI before such people heard of Bitcoin), but not AR/VR.

> I think you’re just objecting on the basis that AI is obviously already immensely useful while other hyped technologies (in their current state) aren’t.

While I do indeed think AI is valuable, I also look at AR/VR and think "this is just another games console — some are handheld, some connect to your TV, this one is on your face". VR just… it just doesn't seem any more hyped than any of the other games consoles over the years that were also "revolutionary" and "amazing photorealistic graphics" etc., and mostly by different people?

Re: Where Will Virtual Reality Take Us?

#38

Post by bugbuddy »

beautifulfreak wrote: post #29
bugbuddy wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is disingenuous to conflate artificial physical and artificial virtual environments. If this is the kind of thinking that is accepted in contemporary discourse without challenge, then it won’t be long before everyone becomes completely subjugated by mediocrity pretending to vanguard. I would take a mediocre physical couch over a virtual one any day. At least, my buttocks will have some cushion with a real couch. W…

That conflation is what Baudrillard addressed in Simulacra and Simulation (a book that the cast of the Matrix were required to read before filming started). When environments are designed, the blueprint is what one experiences in those environments, the conceptual underpinning, even if the environment consists of matter. In a sense, they try to tell us what to think. The book came out in 1983, so these are old ideas,…

As much as I enjoy the Matrix as a movie, I would never consider it a valuable social commentary about how people should live their lives except for maybe to go outside and touch grass regularly.

Re: Where Will Virtual Reality Take Us?

#40

Post by nox101 »

spcebar wrote: post #7

I like this article. It expands on the big question for VR. We have this technology, it's here, it's mostly good enough (with the caveats the article lays out) for a variety of purposes. But what is the purpose consumers will want to use it for? Apple has been the king of telling consumers what they want for years. If they can't sell VR, I don't think anyone can sell VR. This feels like the make or break moment for V…

They want it for pr0n! Just like they wanted VCRs for pr0n.

Super tangential but this documentary is about pr0n going mainstream

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0418753/

In it they point out in the 70s how the movie the documentary is about was a huge public topic of discussion. They show Phil Donahue actually telling people to go see it (or at least I remember that in my memory. If it wasn't him it was some other household name). Eventually the prudes push back and effectively get it banned from lots of places but the VCR comes out and the prudes lose.

VR pr0n is pretty amazing. It's not perfect because there's only so many things that make sense first person. But, when someone gets up close and breaths on you your brain tells you you felt something even though you know that's impossible. If you saw it and didn't find it compelling I'd suggest you ask around for some better examples.

Then there's apps like Virt-A-Mate that take to the next level by being real 3D (Game tech) instead of recorded video. They're not perfect. They have bugs. They run too slow sometimes. But, unlike video, you can change any character to anything you want. That's only going to get better. Apple might ban it but eventually it will be a reason lots of people want VR/AR

Friends at Meta already tell me their metrics say the #1 use of VR is pr0n. (no different than the internet itself.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most-visited_websites

Post reply on HN