No, Virtual Reality Won't Make Us Fat, Stupid Slaves Of Mark Zuckerberg
from the fear-is-the-mind-killer dept
With the HTC Vive and the Oculus Rift prepping for launch over the next few months, the public has only just begun to be inundated with a sound wall of virtual reality media coverage. And while that's great if, like me, you've been waiting for functional, non-vomit-inducing VR since childhood, those unnerved by the idea of strapping a $600 plastic and metal headset to their face for hours will react poorly. The folks that believe games make us violent, Google makes us stupid, and cell phones make us antisocial are going to have an absolute field day demonizing VR. Usually, never having tried it.Right on cue, the backlash began in earnest this week. Countless news outlets and Twitter users circulated this photo of Facebook boss Mark Zuckerberg demonstrating Samsung Gear VR Headsets at the Mobile World Congress this week in Spain. It is, admittedly, very white, very male, and not particularly flattering:
Zuckerberg has said that, in his vision for the future, these virtual experiences will be fundamentally social. But the photo suggests something quite different: Hundreds of people share a physical space, but no perception, no experience, no phenomenological anchor. The communality of a conference (literally from conferre, 'to bring together') is thrown over for a series of hyper-individualized bubbles. And you’re reminded, from Zuckerberg’s awkward semi-smile, that the man who owns the bubbles also owns what’s in them. That controlling virtual reality, in other words, is only a step from controlling reality itself.Ooh, scary! I'm not necessarily a fan of Zuckerberg or his tone-deafness during the recent global net neutrality fracas, but the Post's "digital culture critic" seems more than a little confused by what VR is, and what was happening at the event. As folks like Ben Kuchera were quick to point out the event was mostly harmless, with audience members being greeted with a surprise cameo by Zuckerberg after they took off their headsets. Audience members actually reacted with "gasps of excitement" at glimpsing a t-shirt clad billionaire. Nerdy white dudes being nerdy white dudes, sure. But 1984 this wasn't.
When people unfamiliar with VR see someone in a headset, many immediately picture the fat hovering people in Pixar's Wall-E, happily guzzling sugar water while anesthetized to all greater meaning. But while many spent the week deriding VR as a Zuckerberg-controlled big brother enslavement tool, most of the people that have actually tried VR realize it has amazing potential as a tool for creation, expression and connectivity for artists, story tellers, journalists, and musicians. Again, once people actually try VR, it doesn't take long to see the potential.
Yet all week the photo had a bizarre, hypnotizing effect on the media that overshadowed this fact. Fusion, for example, became oddly transfixed by the heaviest man in the photo, magically equating his daily caloric surplus with the idea that VR will somehow make us all miserable:
If you were to choose an attendee in the crowd who most represents You, it would be probably be this man. Here you are, six years from today: Unsatisfied, dour, a VR headset crammed onto your face. Your belongings are at your feet, your computer balances on your lap, your identifying lanyard hangs from your neck. You are watching…something? It doesn’t matter. You hate it.That's some rich analysis, yo. The existential fear of VR from the Luddite wing of the American electorate is palpably bizarre. The Atlantic, for example, published a piece of moody dystopian fiction based entirely on the heavyset man in the photo. The piece is set years in the future -- after we've all apparently become fatter, sadder and notably less productive thanks to Zuckerberg's villainy.
It apparently needs noting: putting on a VR headset doesn't magically prevent you from eating kale, doing yoga or going for a run. If you're chubby outside of VR, you're still chubby with a headset strapped to your head. That's not somehow VR's fault. At the same time, if you've actually watched some of the developer demos for games like Budget Cuts, you'd realize VR gaming can be a very physical and social experience. Still nerdy as hell, granted. But VR is not, contrary to this week's press narrative, somehow synonymous with servitude and muscle atrophy.
We've been over this before at Techdirt countless times. Each and every time a new technology emerges this same narrative bubbles forth: "this new technology is going to make us less social than ever and usher forth a terrifying future where nobody interacts!" XKCD highlighted quite well a few years ago how this idea is neither accurate nor new, and it's getting downright boring:
Sure, until VR tech can be shrunk down and integrated into contacts or glasses we'll all look downright stupid wearing VR headsets. It's just a fact.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: innovation, mark zuckerberg, moral panics, virtual reality, vr
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Power of Advertising
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I was under the impression that we, as a society, were already all of those things.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Meh. This is a revolution?
Well, yes, and do let me know when the revolution arrives. Right now I see a vanishingly small number of well-to-do dilettantes blinded by smartphones strapped to their faces. In the event that pigs fly, time runs backward, and Oculus sells more units than, say, Google Glass, we might be talking "revolution".
It's not a small distinction. We already have hundreds of niche uses, consumer pilots, "cardboard VR", and every other gimmick introduced over the past decade to convince us that now is the time. And yet "now" always seems to be "later this year or maybe next year". I work in health care, and I'm fascinated by the potential uses in minimally invasive surgery, biochemistry, and procedural education. But at this point they're all potential uses, not practical and widely deployable technology. And they've been potential uses for, well, decades.
So seriously, please do let me know when the revolution arrives. But I'm not holding my breath.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Meh. This is a revolution?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
... to explain why they just looooove their video games, google searches and cell phones.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I'm more worried about Zuckerberg
As for the picture: when I saw I though oh right if Zuckerberg has his way with software development we're having an Oshanta AI scenario. Look up The Last Angel by Proximal Flame. The second book describes why people like Zuckerberg should not be left near social software development.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
VR systems inducing motion sickness has a simple basis, the eyes and the ears telling the brain different stories about motion. So unless you weaken the VR experience, by ensuring that a real world reference is in view, like the edge of a TV, it that is always likely to be a problem for those people susceptible to motion sickness.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Meh. This is a revolution?
And I don't even think it's a matter of letting the cost go down, of either the headsets themselves or the HW required to run them. That will happen in due course. But the usability challenges of VR vs a normal monitor (say a largish UHD one) are hard to overcome. The little things like having to unstrap it from your head vs turn away from a monitor to see something or someone else around you. Having a (necessarily) fairly large contraption weighting down your face, no matter what position you take.
VR looks cool, probably is as cool as can be, but I sure wouldn't call it a revolution. I just hope it doesn't go the way of 3DTVs, because I'm interested in having it pave the way for AR.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Power of Advertising
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Meh. This is a revolution?
I'm not sure how this works, exactly.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
http://spectrum.ieee.org/tech-talk/consumer-electronics/gaming/4d-light-field-displays-ar e-exactly-what-virtual-reality-needs
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Oxford comma, please
I'm not sure porn and video gaming are a playpen for art, nor do I think porn will be adopted at schools any time soon
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Meh. This is a revolution?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Oxford comma, please
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
The quality of the images is not really part of the problem, and artificial gravity, capable of creating forces on the body that correlate with the apparent changes in motion would solve the problem. Solve that problem and flight simulation for example could be perfectly simulated, and require the seat and belts to keep you in the virtual pilots seat.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
VR? Just Another Advertising Platform
But don't lose sight of the fact that VR's being developed by the big boys because it's a new advertising platform, and immersive advertising on VR is also just around the corner. And that's not a side effect of VR -- it's one of the main points. Why else would Facebook and Google be developing it?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Lost Interest
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Meh. This is a revolution?
It has been around for decades and hasn't gone away yet. The experience as been improving as the technology has improved. To be fair 3D for TVs have also been around for decades.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
If these journalists really wanted to talk about dystopian futures, they really don't have to look further than at pictures of families watching TV circa 1975. Hey, maybe they could comment on how those slack-jawed mesmerized boob-tubers were still capable of things like breeding and inventing computers and such.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Oxford comma, please
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Oxford comma, please
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Virtual Reality Won't Make Us Fat, Stupid Slaves Of Mark Zuckerberg
[ link to this | view in thread ]
As someone susceptable to motion sickness already...
Granted my experience with sickness is driving through the Sierra Nevadas. A lot of people puke on windy roads between mountains with no consistent fixed points.
I do get woozy at your standard mall jostle-box-synced to video, but not at Star Tours, Disneyland. Go figure.
What surprises me is how no-one's bothered with head tracking even after Johnny Lee demonstrated head tracking using a Wii. Head Tracking should be the el-cheapo next step for the rest of us who can't yet (or don't trust) the Ocular Rift.
And yet that's a ball that everyone dropped.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
You say that like it's a good thing, or like it somehow makes the whole event less creepy. I see it exactly the opposite way. Everything about that is fucking creepy.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Meh. This is a revolution?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: As someone susceptable to motion sickness already...
That's what the Gear VR is based on, just in using the gyro in your phone. That said, I wish there was a version that was phone agnostic due to the fact that I refuse to buy Samsung's terrible phones.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Meh. This is a revolution?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
I'm also still trying to figure out how VR headsets will work for people with monocular vision.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Meh. This is a revolution?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: As someone susceptable to motion sickness already...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
To use a simpler example, would VR headsets work for a person with only one eye?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
3D TV
Nothing different compared to VR in its current form: It's functionally glasses strapped to their head. And it causes nausea in some people, and some still can't use it at all.
I don't think VR is going to be A Big Thing anytime soon.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
No fixed points in mountain driving
Without fixed objects that one can track, sensory conflicts can occur between the vestibular and ocular senses, which the brain interprets as hallucination, a symptom of a neurotoxin, triggering the area postrema, inducing vomiting.
Personally, I find the experience unpleasant.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: As someone susceptable to motion sickness already...
It sorta turns your computer monitor into a window you're looking through, rather than a fixed image.
Johnny Lee's demo is pretty amazing, and I wonder why no-one has ever bothered to explore it as a gaming tool.
Your standard computer camera and either face-detection software or glasses frames with front-facing targets painted on the sides should be enough to make use of this tech. Seriously cheapo.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Meh. This is a revolution?
But if you want to fly through the universe, explore the ISS, visit the bottom of the ocean, and see computerized worlds come to life, well, VR is probably the closest most will ever get. That's not including completely unique creations, like Sightline, which causes the world to change depending on your point of view. Take that, object permanence!
VR is great, and allows you to see and interact with games in an entirely new way. It's not another Wii, and if you haven't experienced the difference a 360 degree view creates it's hard to understand the immersion in purely technical terms.
Sure, you may not thing it's that impressive after you try it, but before then I'd withhold judgment.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Meh. This is a revolution?
Having never been sky diving, I pretty much think it's boring. 0/10
Having never seen the movie, I'm pretty much underwhelmed. 0/10
Translation:
Having never had an intelligent thought, I'm pretty much an idiot.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Um, no. VR has nearly perfect depth perception. That's the primary reason a powerful computer is needed; VR works by independently rendering separate images for each eye, with images based on the 3D rendering of the scene, which gives the exact same impression you get from seeing actual physical objects.
3D glasses work on a similar principle, but because they require a distant screen, they need to trick your eyes into seeing two different images transposed on the same screen. That's why they're slightly different colors and look fuzzy if you view them without the glasses; they have two simultaneous images rendered together, with the glasses filtering one image for each eye, to create the 3D effect. This is much less convincing, however, since the filter inevitably dilutes the color contrast and because the 3D effect is dependent on your position from the screen, which is why sitting on the edge of 3D movies tends to look weird.
VR has none of these issues, and can make adjustments for your head in 3D space via IR cameras. The effect is on a completely different level from 3D movies. If you thing VR is just another 3D movie but worn on your head you're in for a jarring surprise when you see the real thing.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
In fact, unless you're either extremely sensitive or doing something in VR that's very different from what your body expects, like a roller coaster (not that bad) or a forced camera view (much worse) most people will probably adjust to motion sickness in modern VR in a matter of minutes. VR is probably easier to handle than, say, deep sea boating, and thousands of people do that without issues.
The human body is pretty adaptable. Don't underestimate it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: As someone susceptable to motion sickness already...
The gyro determines your head's rotation. So if you look up, left, right, etc., it's the gyro that is detecting it and adjusting your view.
Head tracking, however, uses IR cameras to determine where your head is in 3D space. With only the gyro, for instance, the system will tell if you look up or down, but not if you move your head forward or backward, like leaning in your chair. This actually isn't that bad for VR, but isn't great for detailed environments, and can be jarring.
The IR cameras give the system a way to tell where your head is, so you can lean forward and objects will move closer to you, duck and look below virtual objects, etc. They aren't present on the Gear VR because they require a special camera on a desk or mount, and the phone version is designed to be portable. The final Rift (and competitors) will have external sensors used for head tracking and controller tracking for hand sensors.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
That being said, it's great and all that you explained the difference between VR 3D and the ol' blue-and-red 3D, but I was only really using that as a point of reference for what sorrykb was asking. If someone has one eye, they can use VR, but it'll basically be only for head tracking. A single-eyed person is not going to get any of that fancy dual-rendered depth perception because it's physically impossible for them to.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I assume you didn't mean it but it's funny anyway!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Obviously if you can't perceive depth in real life you won't be able to in VR, just like it won't make the blind see or the deaf hear. I'm not exactly sure why anyone would expect VR to give someone senses they didn't already have.
That being said, it shouldn't significantly degrade the effect, since it's what the person is already used to.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Your brain is pretty adaptable, and can usually adjust to different sensory input. I had issues going over an hour or so with the Oculus DK2 when I first got it, now I don't have any issues unless I'm in a particularly rough game. In fact, the number one issue that causes motion sickness for me isn't movement but FPS lag or judder.
As long as the framerate doesn't dip most people will be fine after getting used to it, and if you're really motion sickness prone, well, there's probably a lot of really fun things you can't do. That sucks, but it doesn't mean that's the fault of the system.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Too expensive
But hang on, you said it could to VR Porn?!??
...I'M SOLD!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Naa
[ link to this | view in thread ]
A zombified populace = a profitable populace.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
To be a fat slave of technology or not - is up to VR gamer itself. AR VR development itself is much more then games. There are so many VR use cases - for heathcare, agriculture, architecture etc. There are more pros of AR VR then cons I think
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Quite sad that VR (and also AR) doesn't develop fast enough to conquer the market
[ link to this | view in thread ]