this post was submitted on 07 Feb 2024
127 points (100.0% liked)

Asklemmy

1454 readers
75 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

i wouldn't normally be concerned since any company releasing a VR product with this price tag is obviously going to fail... but it's apple and somehow through exquisite branding and sleek design they have managed to create something that resonated with "tech reviewers" and rich folk who can afford it.

what's really concerning is that it's not marketed as a new VR headset, it's marketed by apple and these "tech reviewers" as the new iphone, something you take with you everywhere and do your daily tasks in, consume content in etc...

and it's dystopian. imagine you are watching youtube on this thing and when an ad shows up, you can't look away, even if you try to they can track your eye movement and just move the window, you can't mute it, you certainly cannot install adblock on it, you are forced to watch the ad until it satisfies apple or you just give up and take out the headset.

this is why i think all these tech giants (google meta apple etc) were/are interested in the "metaverse". it holds both your vision and your hearing hostage, you cannot do anything else when using it but to just use the thing. a 100% efficiency attention machine, completely blocking you from the outside world.

i'm not concerned about this iteration as much as people are not hyped about this iteration. just like how people are hyped about the next apple vision, i'm more worried about the next iterations with somewhat lower price tag and better software availability. i hope it flops and i know it probably won't achieve any sort of mainstream adoption even if it's deemed a success because it probably can't get less bulky and look less dorky, but the possibility is still worrying. what are your thoughts?

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] nicetriangle@kbin.social 48 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Some people call VR dystopian, but it's got great potential too.

During COVID while I was living alone and we were under lockdown...

I used a Quest to watch movies in a virtual theater with a bunch of people from around the world. I remember being in a theater watching an absolutely ridiculous Nicolas Cage movie laughing my ass off with a bunch of dudes from Australia. Another time I watched a cricket game with some people who explained the rules to me and kinda gave me some play by play on what was happening.

I've also attended a few support group meetings in VR for coping with loss that had quite a lot of attendants. The meeting was run by a licensed group therapist and we took turns sharing and then reflecting on each others stories. It was frankly amazing.

I also played mini golf with friends of mine as well as had a couple meetings over a round of mini golf with the other guy on my design team during lockdown. Honestly the best virtual meetings I ever had.

All of the above were very social and very positive experience. I didn't feel far away from people, I felt connected to them.

Same way a smartphone can be a useful tool that enhances your life or a screen you stare at for hours consuming bullshit TikTok videos. You're in control of what you make of it. You can also stick to a dumb phone and not participate at all.

[–] BruceTwarzen@kbin.social 18 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I'm not american and i can't imagine a world where someone with these weird ass ski goggles don't get laughed at.

[–] Lmaydev@programming.dev 10 points 9 months ago

Not everyone cares if strangers are laughing at them. Especially the rich.

[–] ferralcat@monyet.cc 16 points 9 months ago (1 children)

because it probably can’t get less bulky and look less dorky,

Airpods are probably one of the ugliest pieces of tech ove seen in the last decade and yet somehow it doesn't seem to matter. Never overestimate apple's customer base.

[–] Seasoned_Greetings@lemm.ee 8 points 9 months ago

They're pretty much the only company on the planet that can push the "because your friends have one" aspect in their marketing and succeed. Apple users think they're all part of this exclusive club and really don't care that they're straight up being robbed by the cost.

[–] PunkFlame@lemmy.ml 14 points 9 months ago (2 children)

I love spaceship games (think Elite: Dangerous and the like), and motorsport games. Anything where you're set in a cockpit is a perfect candidate for VR. All I wanted was a headset that would act analagous to a dumb monitor - simply provide vision and audio and head tracking (with "simply" being a relative term - the challenges overcome and technology produced to date is, admittedly, amazing).

But no. What we have are a bunch of privacy-invading face huggers. I shouldn't need to sign in to anything to use a piece of hardware that should require zero internet access (which is why anything Razer is also on my do not buy list).

So am I concerned about the Apple Vision Pro? Couldn't give a shit to be honest. I'm not their customer.

[–] max@feddit.nl 5 points 9 months ago

Doesn’t valve provide login-free setup and use of SteamVR for the index and the like? Granted, you’ll need a beefy PC for it, and probably some kind of storefront for most games. But at least no Facebook login strapped to your head.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] masto@lemmy.masto.community 14 points 9 months ago (1 children)

At the risk of facts getting in the way:

  1. You can install ad blockers
  2. Apps are not able to do that
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] JCreazy@midwest.social 14 points 9 months ago

It's really easy to avoid if you don't use them.

[–] MrFunnyMoustache@lemmy.ml 13 points 9 months ago (3 children)

I'm hoping to get an open source headset in the future with the opposite feature; augmented reality ad blocking for real life ads.

I could go around the streets of any city and not see a single ad. Pair that with smart adaptive noise cancelling that would allow me to hear the outside world, but remove annoying ads or other unpleasant noises like construction tools or leafblowers.

[–] Tak@lemmy.ml 6 points 9 months ago (2 children)

I'd love to be able to set up a laptop and have much more screen real estate by putting on a headset. The ability to watch something like game of thrones on an airplane without the 6 year old behind me seeing shit would also be nice.

The biggest downside of the apple headset is that it's apple and their stupid ecosystem.

[–] survivalmachine 4 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Oh, man, I would love if I could walk around my town and every billboard and annoying flashy sign were replaced with a bit of smart auto-fill or a color-matched segment of a wallpaper image from my wallpapers folder.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] 0x2d@lemmy.ml 12 points 9 months ago (1 children)

someone should make a de-facebooked custom rom for the meta quest

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] li10@lemmy.ml 12 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I mean, you can just take it off?

Also, regarding the adoption of the headset, I think it’s absolutely crazy to say that it probably won’t get less bulky. Tech is constantly getting smaller and that will be the number one priority with the headset.

If they can make the price and comfort level right, then I do think it becomes a mainstream product. Not saying people wear it 24/7, but that most households would have one, and it would become somewhat important for WFH and remote meetings.

I’m not a fanboy for Apple, but personally I just think it is the tech of the (relatively) near future.

[–] daniyeg@lemmy.ml 2 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children)

it won't get less bulky compared to phones. the headset will still need lenses, a display which itself needs to be a certain distance away from your eyes, a board for processing, a separate battery pack, audio, wifi, straps, space for some airflow so it doesn't overheat and damage the display etc etc. small form factors have come a long way and it can probably get thinner, but i don't think apple vision pro is that far off from the physical limit of how much smaller it can get.

[–] li10@lemmy.ml 11 points 9 months ago

Hmm, we’ll have to agree to disagree there. They can 100% decrease the size of the processing bits and reduce weight.

I just think it’s very shortsighted to look at such an early version of the product and say “it won’t change much”. Especially when however many years ago you could have said that what we’ve got right now isn’t possible.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ulkesh 10 points 9 months ago

Is anyone else worried about the apple vision pro?

Nope.

[–] skillissuer@discuss.tchncs.de 8 points 9 months ago

it's a toy for hype-susceptible tech-impaired rich snobs. what's to be worried about?

[–] jayrhacker@kbin.social 7 points 9 months ago (1 children)

imagine you are watching youtube on this thing and when an ad shows up, you can’t look away, even if you try to they can track your eye movement and just move the window, you can’t mute it, you certainly cannot install adblock on it, you are forced to watch the ad until it satisfies apple

WUT? Apple is very focused on privacy and the idea that a user can't mute or install Adblock is… weird. Safari has good ad-blocking options as well as built-in anti-tracking features to protect users, applications can't usually prevent the system from muting content and Apple doesn't really sell ads outside of the App Store.

If you want to worry about that stuff I'd suggest focusing on the Meta VR goggles or god forbid Google starts making goggles, both of those companies survive on ad revenue and have an incentive to enshitify their experience in ways that the Apple we know today would never do. Of course companies can change over time, but the ethic at Apple is to only make products they feel comfortable with their families using.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] bagfatnick@kulupu.duckdns.org 6 points 9 months ago

For what it’s worth, Apple has had an attention API ( for checking if the user is interacting / viewing ) since the debut of their facial tracking sensors on the iPhone X. Although, Apple makes its very clear it’s not to be used for ads and the such. If it helps I don’t know of any developers / Apple abusing that API.

[–] tiredofsametab@kbin.social 6 points 9 months ago

I will continue not using it. I was interested in Oculus until they sold to FB and then I nope'd right out of that. I really did think VR was neat, but various things kept me from pulling the trigger. If it becomes the only way to use chunks of the internet, I just won't use them; I grew up still in the analog world (though we did have BBS and very early dial-up in the '80s), and I could go back to it. I'd honestly miss educational content more than anything else, but I can get books. In my lifetime, that strategy would probably still work fine.

[–] KingWizard@kbin.social 6 points 9 months ago (4 children)

This is anecdotal, but I see all of these VR rooms or stores at malls or on outlet areas where you can play with VR heat and have fun. They are almost always empty. I VERY rarely ever see people in them.

There another entertainment venue near me that has bowing and games and stuff. They also have a VR area that I have never seen open. Don’t know if it’s just constantly broken or if nobody is actually interested in it.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] JimmyBigSausage@lemm.ee 6 points 9 months ago

Must watch ads.

[–] BurningnnTree@lemmy.one 6 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I think tech reviewers are really naive for thinking that Apple Vision Pro is the future of computing just because it was made by Apple. Nobody wants to use their computer or watch movies in VR, except for in niche situations. My prediction is that users will quickly realize that they don't actually have any use for the Apple Vision Pro, and the product line will be discontinued.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] CybranM@kbin.social 4 points 9 months ago

People were complaining when newspapers were new that itd take everyones attention and make people distant. I think its great that more VR stuff is happening because the tech can be used for so much and lets people experience things they might not have otherwise.
If you were hospitalized for a long period would you rather watch the ceiling/small TV or would you want to travel the world via VR?
All new tech can be used for good or bad but we shouldnt stop progressing

[–] const_void@lemmy.ml 4 points 9 months ago (1 children)

People are going to use these things irresponsibly like when they're driving.

[–] Crotaro 3 points 9 months ago

My gf already sent me an instagram reel of just that and I wanted to just rip their new toy off their faces so bad.

This is the one, if you're interested.

[–] z3rOR0ne@lemmy.ml 4 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

I think what the tech implies these big tech giants want for the world is more worrisome than the specific tech itself.

They may fail with this iteration or the next, but why do you think they're trying so hard insisting this is the next big thing? To survive, capitalism needs to create new problems to be solved. The smart phone didn't solve any problems we had, it created a desire, which then became a fear (FOMO), then it became a need, which then finally became a problem if you didn't have one.

If you're homeless today and want to get out of it, one of the first things you need is an address, then an internet connection, and a smart phone. Why? Because most jobs require it to get a hold of you and in many cases to facilitate the software used on the job.

They don't need to convince consumers to adopt the new tech per se. They just need to convince businesses that without the new technological progress, their competitors will leave them behind. Then it won't matter if you like the tech or not, you'll NEED it to have a job and survive. Just like the smart phone is today.

They're directing us, telling us how the future will look like based off of THEIR vision, not OURS.

That's what worries me. Not this AR headset, but rather the reasons they have for insisting this is the future we are all heading towards.

[–] P1r4nha@feddit.de 3 points 9 months ago (2 children)

It's true that devices like these can gather a lot more data about you than a phone can. The amount of sensors that are always on and look at you and your environment should be a concern.

Luckily Apple isn't directly interested in ad revenue, but more into what apps you use and their biggest interest was always to provide a friction free user experience so you actually want to use their products and are happy to spend so much money on them.

I personally am not a fan of Apple, because I'm not a friend of golden cages. So I'm just waiting for the Android version of the experience. Since this first iteration will be from Google as they would need to update their OS to really accomodate AR applications, that's where my concern lies: How do we know that they are going to handle our data responsibly? Also AR does require quite some infrastructure to provide an interesting experience. Something Apple cannot do, is provide you with a shared experience with other users and to provide location specific, persistent content. There are many examples for such content, but for this discussion, let's say a location specific ad in a fixed location somewhere in the city adjusted to your preferences.

Of course the virtual ad sucks, but such content could also be amazingly awesome and very useful. You no longer need to set up real-life signs, you just update what the virtual sign says in AR. Doesn't need to be an ad, could be something interesting and useful.

But to provide location-specific, persistent content you need infrastructure. Infrastructure only Google and other tech giants have (see for instance the AR mode in Google maps that gives you directions). This is where I'm worried. It's no longer enough to just get internet via a SIM card, maybe add your personal VPN on top to be safer. You now need direct connection to Google's localization API and they'll always know where all their AR devices are and because you wear it, they always know where you are, how you are, where you look etc.. This should leave us worried.

[–] RiderExMachina@lemmy.ml 3 points 9 months ago (1 children)

If Google has an answer, how long will they support it? I bought a Daydream visor and controller, only for them to totally discontinue the project within 2 years.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] kibiz0r@midwest.social 3 points 9 months ago

The attention economy already has people hostage and blocked off from the outside world. No goggles required.

To play devil's advocate: If we're gonna have a tech-centric society, I can see where being able to make eye contact with people nearby and keep your hands free could make for a more wholesome experience than staring down at your phone for 80% of your waking life. And for people who are remote, being able to feel like you're occupying the same space and breathing and laughing together could be a solution for our extreme isolation.

But on the other hand, these are all problems that capitalism and big tech created in the first place, so...

[–] lowleveldata@programming.dev 3 points 9 months ago (1 children)

If anything weird happens some hacker man would probably put up a tutorial on how to disable the eye tracker.

[–] PonyOfWar@pawb.social 2 points 9 months ago

You could probably just put tape over it, but it wouldn't be great as you control the entire OS with the eye trackers.

[–] blargerer@kbin.social 3 points 9 months ago (1 children)

If it succeeds, apple will pave the way, and then other options will emerge much like has happened with smartphones. There will be some FOSS version perfectly capable of blocking ads.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] streetfestival@lemmy.ca 3 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I think for me this thing is a symbol of where we are and where we're heading in terms of not being able to look away from ads

[–] JimmyBigSausage@lemm.ee 3 points 9 months ago

Don’t use devices. Go outside and walk, climb a trre or something. Don’t buy one.

[–] rekabis@lemmy.ca 2 points 9 months ago

If the Apple Vision Pro is going to replace smartphones in the way Smartphones replaced flip phones, we wouldn’t have flip phones anymore.

Spoiler alert: we still have flip phones.

Lots of them, actually, albeit not “dumb” ones anymore… they all run either Android or KaiOS, and come with all the commensurate risks of having all your usage stats beamed up to the mothership for third-party sales and monetization.

Hell, we now have a rotary cell phone - the rotary un-smartphone - which is enjoying decent popularity and mental rent-free status among lots of techy people, despite being nothing more than a 1970s rotary dialler with an ePaper display for incoming text messages. And a few buttons for hard-set quick-dial options. I would love one myself if it wasn’t so expensive compared to a smartphone.

[–] Melatonin@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›