Technology
This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.
Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.
Rules:
1: All Lemmy rules apply
2: Do not post low effort posts
3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff
4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.
5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)
6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist
7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed
view the rest of the comments
Again, I'm not clear on what a virtual world could offer you that stuff like Second Life didn't already offer. My argument is that hardware simply introduces an additional barrier to the idea that hasn't caught on to begin with.
VR doesn't allow you to leave behind your imperfect real world any more than a good show, game, or a book. Having actually used VR, I can firmly say that the level of immersion simply isn't there. For VR to feel truly immersive you'd likely need to have some kind of a brain/computer interface and we're many decades away from that. I'm sure headsets will keep getting better and smaller, but real immersion requires simulating other senses as well. Basic stuff like moving around in VR without getting nauseous is an unsolved problem right now.
Meeting people with a VR headset on isn't really that different from meeting people by looking at the screen. In fact, this kind of stuff seems far more promising to me.
The fact that people are pouring billions into this idea, doesn't mean that it's magically going to overcome all the challenges and all the competition. My main argument here is that VR has to compete with other forms of entertainment, and many existing options provide high quality entertainment with a lower entry barrier. This is the fatal flaw that I see in the foreseeable future.
Supposedly the internet was most used, in the beginning, by jen watching porn. if they want to make VR popular, they need to make porn interactive somehow. Nodes that can be attached to a man's sensitive areas and maybe to his hands. That would take a long time to put on - if there were tiny wires in a super-thin body suit that were a bit like nylon stockings, then that might help. That's a great way to finance it, I think. The technology isn't there, yet. But, I think robotics technology could be combined with VR somewhat - in the suit, that is.
they'll just partner up with RealDoll
re @jazzfes@lemmy.ml as well
Look, I know VR or AR tech is not there yet, I'm not claiming it is. I'm not even claiming the metaverse will be a success. I'm just saying, don't dismiss the incredible potential it has
I agree that VR and AR have a lot of potential, so I'm not dismissing technology as such here. My argument is specifically against metaverse as a product.
Fully agree with you here and particularly your longer response above.
VR / AR has some fantastic use cases in industrial work, where experienced workers can overshadow a field person and be enriched by some sort of global database that covers whatever that field person is working on. There are probably other niche tech use cases as well.
As for an entertainment gadget that is widely used, I just don't think it is as immersive as portrayed or will be in the foreseeable future.