Support NeoGAF

[Durante]

The major comprehension problem in this thread is a common one: people generally have trouble parsing conditionals.

Note that Palmer's entire statement follows on the condition "If you can perfectly simulate reality". Everything after that makes perfect sense put into this context.

As for wasting resources, I know I'd rather do most project meetings in VR than spend 8 hours on planes and 4 in airports to do an 8 hour project meeting

 

[-SD-]

What a stupid OP.

Palmer has never said anything "crazy".

 

[Hellsing321]

Er he's saying that if, at some point decades from now, VR becomes so good we can't distinguish between it and reality, what's the difference between interacting with some virtually and interacting in reality?

 

[Raist]

Luckey is the Wozniak of VR, you can't find a much friendlier guy in the industry. So to me it's amazing how of a sudden anonymity and an internet connection and can lead people to be offended over a guy who is just standing in a crowd spinning off thoughts around something he loves. He was talking about a hypothetical future because people were engaging him questions. OR is not a conspiracy to make people antisocial.

So what do we do at some point in the future when VR is more appealing than life itself? It's a question we'll have to take on eventually. Even me as a VR enthusiast I have my worries abut this.

Maybe I missed a lot of things he said, but before the FB deal I had the impression he'd always talk about how they want to make their VR solution really good, push tech specs etc.

Now in the space of couple of weeks he's just making these silly statements (this one, and the past one about VR killing TVs, most people will have PCs with monster specs). It's like he suddenly turned into Krazy Ken or something.
All I'm saying is that maybe they could have a consumer-ready product first, see how sales trend, if developers follow, before going straight into "we're gonna rule the world" type of discourses.

 

[Gonzo The Great]

This comment reminds me of what my grand father used to say about me "wasting" my time playing video games. When people grow up with this technology being the norm his statements start to make more sense.

There's a difference between playing a game and trying to replace human beings with holograms. Some of the responses in this thread make me sad.

 

[crazygambit]

It's not crazy, it's futurist. It sounds crazy now because the technology hasn't even come out yet, but I'd hardly say Luckey is off-base with his comments.

I'm not sure I see a scenario where each person puts on an OR to have a conference call. Skype is good enough for what's needed I guess, if you're looking to save on plane trips.

For other kinds of interactions, actual human contact will probably never be beat.

I'm being incredibly factious but people still go to movie theaters after TV's were invented. Human physical interaction still has value.

People don't go to movies for the human interaction, that's the least appealing part of the package. They go because of big screens and kick ass sound systems, better than what the have at home.

 

[Solid Samus]

The major comprehension problem in this thread is a common one: people generally have trouble parsing conditionals.

Note that Palmer's entire statement follows on the condition "If you can perfectly simulate reality". Everything after that makes perfect sense put into this context.

As for wasting resources, I know I'd rather do most project meetings in VR than spend 8 hours on planes and 4 in airports to do an 8 hour project meeting

full context doesn't mean a thing when the purpose of your thread is simply to be seen. Gaf gonna gaf gonna gaf gonna gaf gonna gaf.

Gaf on, y'all.

 

[MagnaderAlpha]

It's not crazy, it's futurist. It sounds crazy now because the technology hasn't even come out yet, but I'd hardly say Luckey is off-base with his comments.

This is the type of future worth fighting against.

 

[Exuro]

I'm not sure I see a scenario where each person puts on an OR to have a conference call. Skype is good enough for what's needed I guess, if you're looking to save on plane trips.

For other kinds of interactions, actual human contact will probably never be beat.

We're talking about perfect simulation. Ignore OR completely. His statement had nothing to do with the current product nor a near future one.

I don't see whats crazy about his statement. If you could perfectly simulate the world around you, that is emulating all 5 senses and presenting a realistic depiction of your life then I can easily see people substituting part of their lives(And for some people most/all of it) in the simulated version.

 

[burst]

How do we know we aren't already in a simulation of a simulation of a simulation of a simulation....

 

[Wray]

So many narrow minded views in this thread.

"Human Interaction" is just a bunch of sensory signals going to your brain. When...and I emphasize...when...not...if...that becomes possible through virtual reality, it will be THE EXACT SAME THING.

You WILL be having the SAME social interaction with other human beings. Your brain...which is what controls how you perceive reality, will see/feel/taste/smell/hear Polygon Fred identically to Bio Fred.

Just because you cannot grasp that concept, doesn't make it any less so.

 

[ironcreed]

This comment reminds me of what my grand father used to say about me "wasting" my time playing video games. When people grow up with this technology being the norm his statements start to make more sense.

Yes, because human interaction in reality is just so old fashioned. Playing games is a hobby and is hardly on the same level of what we are discussing here. What this guy said is that real human interaction is overrated compared to using VR. Again, good luck pushing that shit. You are going to need it.

 

[flyinpiranha]

It's amazing how a sudden, giant lump of cash can lead people to say really stupid shit.
Maybe they should put something out first and then do some extrapolation.

He's always said this type of stuff. He's 21 and pushing forward VR in a way that not even Sony could do. He's basically the face of VR right now ... at 21.

A lot of his stuff is taken out of context, where he'll be speaking on a tangent about stuff and most of it isn't "THIS IS HOW YOU WILL ONLY DO THING" type of talk but options or not even based on the Oculus Rift itself.

In the other thread people are like "But my family, they will wither and die if I can't talk to them while watching Real Housewives!" ... it's like saying if you own a car you can't have a motorcycle ... "HOW WILL MY FAMILY RIDE WITH ME?!"

A motorcycle is a singular vehicle (sure, somebody could ride on the back, but it's really not the point) and is used at times for when you don't have to "OMG, my family, my fiance, my kids! What about them?!?".

You can't take every single thing he says at face value, everything he says is recorded and disseminated. It's all in context.

He does think TVs will be going away a lot sooner than I think though, so there's that. Based mainly on materials and shipping costs .. so there is logic to it, but I don't think it will be widely accepted. I mean, there are still land line phones.

I'm sure if just 130 years ago you told people that were going to the "theater" to watch plays that "You won't even have to leave your house to see the most famous people act on stage, you'll just look at a screen the size of a simple window and you'll be able to watch 'plays' from around the world as they are happening!" they would call you fucking crazy. He just thinks way ahead. Most people think "Holy shit, he's saying that I won't ever touch my fiance' again because Facebook"

 

[Sephiroth_VII]

There's that time compression thing rearing its ugly head again.

50+ years, ok. 10 years? Dream on.

Games now:

Games 10 years ago:

Games 20 years ago:

Games 30 years ago:

I don't see why it's unrealistic to expect see games which are practically indistinguishable from reality 10 years from now, and certainly not 20. The above games were the peak of real-time graphics at the time, AFAIK.

 

[GuitarAtomik]

I think he has a point. Certain meetings and such could be handled remotely like that. But I mean, if you can do that why not just video call? I don't see the applicable differences between being able to fully see someone in a virtual environment or just seeing a flat, live video of them.

Presentations. Specifically ones with a lot of visuals. For example, my GF is an interior designer. When presenting to clients, she has to show a lot of visual concepts like floor plans or renderings of spaces. Clients need to go through piece by piece and be able to say "I like this part, but can we change this" so on and so forth. This is pretty impossible to do over video so instead, they fly out a few people either to the client (along with the hassle of multitudes of presentation material and boards) or the client flies to them.

Now imagine they can do all that in a virtual space. Everyone is in the same virtual conference room where materials can be shown and maybe even edited in everyone's presence. Hell, you could even walk them through a 3D model of the space if they were that far along. Time is saved. Money is definitely saved. That's just one example.

 

[georly]

I hate the human interaction of going to a theater, the only reason I go is because movies are shown there exclusively for like 6 months. Hating loud people in theaters, hating cell phone users in theaters, there's so many cliches. If you had the choice of watching a new release in theater or at home on day 1, I don't see theaters lasting.

Pretty true. The only reason theaters still exist is because hollywood/theater owners make them exist. Because they can make money by selling your average joe the movie TWICE, once in theaters, once at home, with theaters costing more than twice as much as watching it at home (w/ 2 + people).

Theaters wouldn't go away 100%, as some people prefer to watch movies there, but 80-90% would vanish and it would be the equivalent of going to see sports live at the stadium, vs watching them on tv.

 

[Wray]

Do you want to know what would happen if I told my wife, "Hey, honey. Let's just put on the VR headsets for our date tonight"?

No, you don't want to know.

That's not a problem with VR. It's a problem with your wife being narrowminded and you being unable to deal with that.

 

[Nealand Liquor]

I for one can wait to "jack" in and never leave MY playboy mansion reality!

 

[Lunar15]

The future of NeoNeoGAF:

As for wasting resources, I know I'd rather do most project meetings in VR than spend 8 hours on planes and 4 in airports to do an 8 hour project meeting

It'd also solve one of the worst nuisances in business: The conference call. Sure, there's video conferencing, but being able to walk around, talk, and see facial expressions as if you're in the same room as the other person would go a long way to solve a lot of communication issues.

 

[Graphics Horse]

That's not a problem with VR. It's a problem with your wife being narrowminded and you being unable to deal with that.

Are you expecting this argument to be physically relevant in your lifetime?

 

[Freeman]

Reality: Two people sitting on a table, each looking at their own smartphone.
Perfect VR: Watching a recreation of the Big Bang while you eat without having to worry about calories at the most expensive restaurant you can imagine (bonus: your ugly gf will look like Scarlett Johansson).

To bad I will be dead once this happens.

 

[CambriaRising]

Am I real?

 

[Glass Shark]

I may be in the minority, but I don't think he's wrong.

 

[Donnie]

Not crazy at all, not something I entirely agree with because I think real human interaction is necessary and definitely shouldn't be marginalised. However I can see his point of view to some degree and on a smaller scale I can agree. Why send millions of people a year flying round the world on business trips to conventions for instance if they can all go there and see what they need to see and say what they need to say without ever leaving the office or home.

 

[Graphics Horse]

It'd also solve one of the worst nuisances in business: The conference call. Sure, there's video conferencing, but being able to walk around, talk, and see facial expressions as if you're in the same room as the other person would go a long way to solve a lot of communication issues.

 

[Wray]

Games now:


Games 10 years ago:


Games 20 years ago:


Games 30 years ago:


I don't see why it's unrealistic to expect see games which are practically indistinguishable from reality 10 years from now, and certainly not 20. The above games were the peak of real-time graphics at the time, AFAIK.

While I agree that the type of tech Palmer is talking about is going to happen alot sooner than 50 years (Im thinking 20-25), its a big more complicated than saying...look at games 20 years ago, then look at them now. Fully immersive VR like the Matrix is likely going to be very dependent on technological advancement in the nanotech sector. That's probably what we're going need to do full Matrix VR.

 

[justjustin]

I don't think he believes we will someday perfectly simulate reality-- there's no point since there would be no practical difference (not to mention it's impossible to reverse engineer an exponentially expanding universe that will outlast us all). He's just making the point that you don't need to prove a thing is real to find it meaningful. "Real" is overrated, and not something to be valued in itself.

I'd argue we've been escaping reality and inventing our own since the day we started making cave paintings. And now, thousands of years later, we spend much of our free time engaged in art and staring at screens. Most of what we experience daily and find important in our lives-- the things we struggle to adapt to-- are manifestations of someone else's imagination. This was not always the case, and the trend will certainly continue with VR and more convincing simulations.

 

[Wray]

Are you expecting this argument to be physically relevant in your lifetime?

Yes. On two counts.

1.) The tech needed for this is a few decades away...not centuries.

2.) Other advancements, specifically in medical fields are going to drastically increase life expectancy. 20 years from now, the average life expectancy is going to be well past 100.

 

[syko de4d]

Am I real?

Maybe not. Who knows if we are not part of a simulation? Ask yourself if you believe if we could create a simulation like this in some hundred years, if you believe this why shouldnt it be possible that we are already a simulation. Maybe all this super crazy quantum theory stuff is just part of the simulation to save ressources and if we talk about multiple universe we really talk about multiple simulations xD

A universe should have millions or billions of far advanced species. If they all create their own simulated Universe it would mean one real universum would contain billions of simulated universes. So the chances are pretty high to be in one of the simulated ones and not in the one real one.

Just some crazy talk, dont take it to seriously

 

[QaaQer]

Sex, for one.

Perfectly realized VR will make crack look like Sanka. It would be funny if VR is what takes down humanity, a bunch of people sitting in their own filth 'living' power fantasies and fucking supermodels.

 

[rjinaz]

Because I like really getting dressed up to go eat real food in a real public place with real physical interactions. Do you want to know what would happen if I told my wife, "Hey, honey. Let's just put on the VR headsets for our date tonight"?

No, you don't want to know.

I really, really want VR to crash and burn, because comments like this are pure hubris and show an utter lack of attention to what people actually need/want.

I'll admit that line in particular is a bit extreme. People will always want and need to physically interact with other people. As others have said though, there are times where physical interactions aren't necessary. I don't drive to my parents house every time I want to talk to them, I just text or call. VR can be an extension of that.

The example you gave is just as extreme. Obviously it would be more enjoyable to go on an actual date with your wife, though I can imagine in the future VR will create experiences that are exciting and compelling enough that a virtual trip together would be something couples do.

You don't want VR I think that much is obvious from reading the comments you make in VR related threads but I certainly do and there are certainly others that do want it as well. I don't want it to replace the real world for me, but I do want to use it as a means of escapism on occasion much in the same way that I use games, movies, and books for that now. And I also can see VR as a means on evolution of non-physical communication.

 

[Graphics Horse]

Yes. On two counts.

1.) The tech needed for this is a few decades away...not centuries.

2.) Other advancements, specifically in medical fields are going to drastically increase life expectancy. 20 years from now, the average life expectancy is going to be well past 100.

Why would you care about your real health when you can have virtua-health? Once medical advances will also let us keep a brain in a box, what else could you possibly need?

 

[flyinpiranha]

Perfectly realized VR will make crack look like Sanka. It would be funny if VR is what takes down humanity, a bunch of people sitting in their own filth 'living' power fantasies and fucking supermodels.

Shit already happens with people neglecting children and stabbings over MMOs. It definitely will be a huge issue when VR takes off.

I mean, it's like anything really. Some people piss in bottles and never leave the PC while others can play for an hour and then go cook dinner for the family. Some people can drink every other weekend socially and some have to be hammered just to function at work.

Why would you care about your real health when you can have virtua-health? Once medical advances will also let us keep a brain in a box, what else could you possibly need?

How cool is the box? I will need the latest Samsung box to feel good about that situation.

 

[Byakuya769]

If my waifu could be perfectly simulated, wouldn't gaf feel like shit for clowning me for posting pics of a gf I've never known?

 

[-COOLIO-]

well, for all we know, we could be in a perfect simulation of reality.

 

[ironcreed]

Perfectly realized VR will make crack look like Sanka. It would be funny if VR is what takes down humanity, a bunch of people sitting in their own filth 'living' power fantasies and fucking supermodels.

LOL.

 

[jacksepticeye]

A man who is the fore runner for VR and who is passionate about it happening is bound to say something like that.

 

[-COOLIO-]

'Real' life is virtual, we perceive reality through a veil of structural fictions which allow us to integrate and make sense of everything we experience.

this is a good point. at the end of the day, everything is just brains signals. that's our reality.

 

[QaaQer]

Why would you care about your real health when you can have virtua-health? Once medical advances will also let us keep a brain in a box, what else could you possibly need?

Well, we are rapidly approaching the transhuman future. And when that happens, our successor species will probably look back at us the way we look back at early primates. We cannot understand how they will perceive the universe anymore than my dog can understand me.

 

[Graphics Horse]

How cool is the box? I will need the latest Samsung box to feel good about that situation.

It's pretty cool for the latest model, but you can't change it once you're in there. You're given a choice of being blasted off into deep space or sent to the bottom of the ocean with enough life support to enjoy a healthy VR existence.

 

[AllIsOneIsNone]

well, for all we know, we could be in a perfect simulation of reality.

Inception, a dream within a dream, the Matrix, Palmer Luckey is the one, project Morpheus, only way to fly, whoa.gif.

If you're interested in the question of whether or not AI or in this case digital media could ever fully emulate conscious experience, I recommend reading up on Searle's "Chinese Room Argument". I was way into philosophy of the mind in college, very interesting stuff.

 

[rjinaz]

Shit already happens with people neglecting children and stabbings over MMOs. It definitely will be a huge issue when VR takes off.

I mean, it's like anything really. Some people piss in bottles and never leave the PC while others can play for an hour and then go cook dinner for the family. Some people can drink every other weekend socially and some have to be hammered just to function at work.



How cool is the box? I will need the latest Samsung box to feel good about that situation.

This is exactly right. People don't need VR to cut themselves off from reality, they can do it right now with a distraction of their choice, be it drugs, food, video games, movies, or television. If people want to stop caring about the world, they will one way or another.

However, VR does take this to the extreme because it makes cutting oneself off from the world extremely easy and it also provides a sense of realism that hasn't been possible before. Many people will no doubt fall victim to VR addiction that otherwise would not have been addicted to other types of similar life distractions.

That being said, people are responsible for their own behavior. Nobody forces them to do anything, it is the choices they make. There is nothing dangerous about VR, but it can be abused like many things in life and its up to people to be responsible with VR just as they are with other such things that might be addicting like drinking, gambling, and yes even video games. Not wanting VR to exist because it can potentially harm certain individuals making bad choices would mean taking away other things that can potentially harm individuals making bad choices, things I currently enjoy responsibly.

 

[QaaQer]

That being said, people are responsible for their own behavior. Nobody forces them to do anything, it is the choices they make. There is nothing dangerous about VR, but it can be abused like many things in life and its up to people to be responsible with VR just as they are with other such things that might be addicting like drinking, gambling, and yes even video games. Not wanting VR to exist because it can potentially harm certain individuals making bad choices would mean taking away other things that can potentially harm individuals making bad choices, things I currently enjoy responsibly.

Just curious, are you a libertarian? Do you think heroin, cocaine, etc should be legal and freely available? I can see VR becoming illegal if affects GDP and/or families.

 

[Paches]

At some point it could even be [considered to be] irresponsible to waste the resources to...why did you need to get on a plane and burn all of that fuel to ship yourself over when you could have just hopped in your VR headset?

Couldn't the same argument be made if you just swap out "your VR headset" with "your video conferencing technology of choice"? What is the benefit of a meeting with business clients over long distances in a VR world over projecting a video conference on a wall like people do now.

 

[harSon]

I dunno I think he has a point. Obviously people aren't just going to be in their own rooms with VR headsets 24/7, but the benefits of VR and social features are certainly real. It's like the next step after Skype.

You have too much faith in humanity

 

[Dictator93]

This looks so hilarious. I could probably not take it seriously the first two or 3 times I would see that thing roll out.

 

[rjinaz]

Just curious, are you a libertarian? Do you think heroin, cocaine, etc should be legal and freely available? I can see VR becoming illegal if affects GDP and/or families.

As I said, there is nothing inherently dangerous about VR. There obviously is with the drugs you listed so to answer your questions, no and no.

 

[rokkerkory]

matrix much?

 

[Coconut]

We already live in a simulation I don't need another simulation on top of that.

 

[Auto-Reply]

Perfectly realized VR will make crack look like Sanka. It would be funny if VR is what takes down humanity, a bunch of people sitting in their own filth 'living' power fantasies and fucking supermodels.

Sign me the fuck up... i already got the "filth" part down!