[HN Gopher] Meta launches Hyperscape, technology to turn real-wo...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Meta launches Hyperscape, technology to turn real-world spaces into
       VR
        
       Author : PaulHoule
       Score  : 77 points
       Date   : 2025-10-05 13:42 UTC (3 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (techcrunch.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (techcrunch.com)
        
       | wewewedxfgdf wrote:
       | The Zuck really doesn't want to let go of the MetaVerse does he?
        
         | not_a_bot_4sho wrote:
         | Metaverse is a huge deal among Zune owners and Quiby
         | subscribers.
        
           | shermantanktop wrote:
           | I heard about on MySpace. I think it's going to be Web 2.1!
        
         | mrheosuper wrote:
         | And i happy for that. Someone has to bite the bullet to push
         | the VR tech.
        
           | hansmayer wrote:
           | Right, but why?
        
             | reassess_blind wrote:
             | Because someone needs to pour the money in to get us to
             | "Ready Player One" level game immersion.
        
               | Cthulhu_ wrote:
               | But is there much of a demand for it? VR has been a
               | feature of video games for over a decade now, last time I
               | used it I thought it was good enough (that was 6-7 years
               | ago), technology wise. But it's nowhere near as popular
               | as e.g. regular displays.
               | 
               | Any movie depictions of VR are fully immersive - Ready
               | Player One (at least the film) takes some liberties in
               | depicting the game world as if it's immersive, even
               | though the guy plays with VR glasses and force feedback
               | gloves/suits, all current-day technology. Most others
               | have a direct brain interface. Some (Star Trek) model a
               | realistic immersive environment around the player, but
               | both of those are very much science fiction still.
               | 
               | There's some brain / tech interfaces, but if I recall
               | correctly the brain has to learn to handle the signals
               | first, there's no way to create a perfect, instant link.
        
               | lm28469 wrote:
               | The people who wish for these worlds are either complete
               | shut in, terminally online or already spending 8+ hours a
               | day playing video games and walking past their lives.
        
               | andybak wrote:
               | No. We're fairly normal actually.
        
               | lm28469 wrote:
               | The numbers don't lie though, statistically nobody wants
               | VR, we haven't even reached the numbers they were
               | predicating for 2016, 10 years later ...
               | 
               | > It says 96 million VR headsets will be shipped in 2020
               | 
               | https://www.forbes.com/sites/paullamkin/2016/02/17/wearab
               | le-...
               | 
               | Turns out they sold half as much.... in 5 years:
               | https://startupsmagazine.co.uk/article-over-51-million-
               | vr-he...
               | 
               | > the VR/AR market will reach $182 billion in revenue,
               | including hardware and software/content, by 2025 and
               | bypass television.
               | 
               | https://www.startbeyond.co/media/idcvrrevenuereport
               | 
               | Meanwhile: "The global virtual reality (VR) market size
               | was valued at $16.32 billion in 2024"
               | 
               | I don't know anyone with a social life who care about
               | these toys, the only people I know of who are semi
               | interested already spend 6+ hours a day gaming.
        
               | andybak wrote:
               | I don't care how many people want it. I personally never
               | claimed it was going to be a huge mass market thing. It's
               | big enough to be sustainable.
               | 
               | Stupid claims by people trying to pump investment hype
               | have no bearing on my interest in the medium.
               | 
               | > I don't know anyone with a social life who care about
               | these toys, the only people I know of who are semi
               | interested already spend 6+ hours a day gaming.
               | 
               | The people I know with an interest in VR are mainly
               | artists and other forms of creatives. We must move in
               | different circles.
        
               | theshackleford wrote:
               | > I don't know anyone with a social life who care about
               | these toys
               | 
               | On the other hand, I do. Isnt it crazy that like,
               | different people have different experiences? Who would
               | have thought!
        
               | gmueckl wrote:
               | They are also e.g. architects and designers who get
               | amazing new tools to check their work and present it to
               | clients. What is more honest than getting to walk through
               | e.g. a life size mockup of a building? Now you can do
               | that before the ground is even broken.
        
               | lm28469 wrote:
               | These tools already exist and have nothing to do with the
               | metaverse. This is such a weird argument, as if we needed
               | meta to spend 10-50b a year in their bs to have these
               | tools...
        
               | andybak wrote:
               | Tools exist to view architectural spaces in the same way
               | a headset can without a headset? I'm slightly confused.
               | 
               | Or maybe you think a headset doesn't add anything to the
               | experience of viewing a space. If so, I'd have to ask
               | whether you'd actually used one. Because if there's any
               | inarguably uniquely appropriate use case for VR, it's
               | "viewing architectural spaces"
        
               | reassess_blind wrote:
               | I don't think it needs to be perfect for there to be
               | massive demand, but it does need to get a lot better than
               | it currently is.
               | 
               | Games where you are stationary (racing simulation,
               | mainly) are better suited to it. Gran Turismo 7 in PSVR2
               | with a Logitech racing wheel was a ridiculously immersive
               | experience. I played through the whole game in VR and it
               | was one of the best gaming experiences I've had and
               | certainly the most immersive, particularly as a diehard
               | car guy. But racing sims are fairly niche.
               | 
               | Outside of racing sims, it's still immersive, but any
               | games with character movement give me immediate motion
               | sickness, the movement is too clunky and disorienting.
               | 
               | If they can figure that out at a reasonable price point
               | the demand will be there because the immersion is just
               | night and day against a screen.
        
               | theshackleford wrote:
               | > last time I used it I thought it was good enough (that
               | was 6-7 years ago), technology wise.
               | 
               | Many of us didnt. I wouldnt call low resolution and low
               | PPI (significantly lower than desktop displays) "good
               | enough." Not to mention terrible optics. I would use my
               | current device a lot more if it could match the
               | "viewable" resolution of my desktop displays, but
               | currently, it can not.
        
               | lm28469 wrote:
               | Meta alone could have solved like 50% of famines/heavy
               | malnutrition currently happening in the world if they
               | used their metaverse budget to do something useful. And
               | they'd still be so rich they wouldn't know what to do
               | with the leftovers.
               | 
               | No one "needs" to push for that bullshit metaverse, the
               | real world isn't shitty enough, yet, apparently they're
               | dead set and achieving that, for people to wish to live
               | in a computer.
        
               | cloudflare728 wrote:
               | You don't understand how money works.
               | 
               | They are not burning money, they are employing people
               | like you directly or through 3rd party partner companies.
               | The beneficiaries can decide themselves how to spend
               | money. They can live a good life or help others.
        
               | lm28469 wrote:
               | Ah yes, they're just redistributing the money, the
               | trickle down economy right ? They're basically a non
               | profit humanitarian association at that point
        
               | cloudflare728 wrote:
               | Profit or loss is out of the equation.
               | 
               | Somehow Facebook getting a huge amount of money. They are
               | distributing that money to a million people (directly or
               | indirectly to employees, share holders, employees of 3rd
               | party partners). Some people are getting billions and
               | some are getting $100s.
               | 
               | Instead of handful of people in Facebook management
               | deciding to be humanitarian, you now have a million
               | people deciding what to do with their portion. It is that
               | simple.
        
               | throw-10-8 wrote:
               | Still living in the 80's?
               | 
               | Seems like you are the one with an outdated model of how
               | money works.
               | 
               | Over the last couple decades it has been moving up at an
               | ever increasing rate instead of down.
        
               | reassess_blind wrote:
               | It would be interesting to see how much of a difference a
               | lump sum of $50 billion would make, or not make, to long
               | term world hunger.
               | 
               | It's a lot of money, but the WFP has spent more than that
               | in the past 10 years on the problem.
               | 
               | A lot of the issues with world hunger aren't easy solved
               | by throwing more money at it. Politics, logistics,
               | corruption etc. It can't be solved without money either,
               | of course.
               | 
               | Not to say that money couldn't be better spent elsewhere
               | than the metaverse.
        
               | hansmayer wrote:
               | If you take money for what it should be - a measure of
               | work invested towards achieving a result, then yes, I
               | suppose we could get a lot done with people employed out
               | of that 50B working towards the goal of ending the world
               | hunger. Heck, I'd even argue building a moon base with
               | that money would have been a better investment than the
               | crap the "magnificent 7" is pushing on us.
        
             | taskforcegemini wrote:
             | why not? As good as the options have become, for many
             | purposes they are still not quite there yet
        
               | fragmede wrote:
               | Yeah, but how are we going to get there if we don't work
               | on it?
        
             | ildon wrote:
             | As soon as I've tried the VR experience myself for
             | something I actually found useful/entertaining (VR sports),
             | I was immediately sold on the idea. I can't wait for this
             | tech to get better and better
        
         | the_gipsy wrote:
         | The FacebookVerse.
        
         | Cthulhu_ wrote:
         | He should've just spent the money to buy Roblox, Fortnite or
         | Minecraft. Second Life at a stretch.
        
         | lm28469 wrote:
         | I was in LA in 2015 at the peak of the VR hype, I don't think
         | zuck got the memo that it flopped hard between then and now.
        
           | supportengineer wrote:
           | Did you encounter any Kouriers while travelling from one
           | burbclave to the next?
        
         | hnlmorg wrote:
         | There is some sense in it and I'm surprised by all the
         | naysayers here.
         | 
         | For starters, Quest is by far the biggest selling VR/XR
         | headset. So he is already seeing some success here.
         | 
         | And as we've seen before, Facebook isn't going to dominate
         | forever. It makes complete sense throwing large sums of money
         | at future technology while you still have large sums of money
         | to burn.
         | 
         | Chasing new technology when you're already behind and your
         | revenue is decline is a guaranteed way to fail.
         | 
         | Moonshots like this you waste a tonne of money when that money
         | is comparatively cheap anyway. Plus it keeps people talking
         | about your business, which is never a bad thing.
        
           | bonesss wrote:
           | Critically, in my estimation: Facebook/Instagram is delivered
           | on phones, browsers, and PCs not owned by Meta. Boardroom
           | politics could tank huge chunks of their business model
           | without recourse.
           | 
           | Meta establishing VR and the underlying ecosystem, building a
           | moat, makes lots of long term sense (if they succeed).
        
       | halflife wrote:
       | Semi related, is horizon worlds still a thing? Is it being
       | developed? Are there active users?
        
         | queltos wrote:
         | Surprisingly it is. Thought it was dead in the water especially
         | against VRChat. But it is continuously worked on and if I did
         | get that right it will get a new engine as well. Accidently
         | hopped into some worlds recently as they are (annoyingly)
         | promoting it heavily in the quest library. And there are plenty
         | of worlds with many players, 99% of which being small kids it
         | feels.
        
       | growthwtf wrote:
       | Rendering takes a few hours means humans are building it at least
       | partially.
        
         | andybak wrote:
         | False. This is just gaussian splats being queued up on a server
         | somewhere
        
           | growthwtf wrote:
           | You could be correct, but it would be a real indictment of
           | their rendering farm I think.
        
             | andybak wrote:
             | It's not "rendering" with gaussian splats. It's more
             | "training" (or "fitting"). And not knowing how much the
             | usage vs compute ratio is, I would hesitate to comment.
             | 
             | But knowing a little bit about gaussian splatting, I can't
             | think what manual steps requiring human assistance are even
             | likely to be necessary?
        
       | clintonb wrote:
       | VRML was one of my early computing interests. I'm actually
       | excited for more ways to share 3D spaces with folks!
        
         | aitchnyu wrote:
         | In 2000, I was 10 when I downloaded a web page with an applet
         | to walk into a cell. But a VRML player was a whopping 10mb and
         | it would have jammed up the phone line for hours and costed a
         | fortune.
        
         | skeezyjefferson wrote:
         | remember even back THEN, they said VR would change how we work.
         | I guess its just a common misconception we keep making
        
       | UberFly wrote:
       | Meta is the Yahoo of current platforms. It happens to all of them
       | eventually...
        
       | XorNot wrote:
       | This one is actually quite interesting: there's direct uses for
       | any ability to rapidly extract digital representations of
       | physical spaces.
        
         | righthand wrote:
         | Like spying on the room around the person and trying to
         | advertise to them more Funko Pop dolls?
         | 
         | What are the other direct uses?
        
           | baq wrote:
           | Remodeling a kitchen for one.
        
           | Cthulhu_ wrote:
           | I can think of a few:
           | 
           | * Surveys (I had the county come in once in my sort-of legal
           | rental appartment when they were legalising them, they needed
           | to make a floor plan and fire safety recommendations)
           | 
           | * Real estate, which already uses 360 degree photo's and
           | simplified 3d floor plan models
           | 
           | * Video games. Very generic usage.
           | 
           | * Virtualised museums, but those would likely need extra work
           | to make all the placards etc readable
           | 
           | * Street View next level, also indoor navigation.
        
             | throw-10-8 wrote:
             | And how many of those does Meta have existing revenue and
             | distribution model for?
             | 
             | Its pretty safe to assume that the primary driver of this
             | is data hoovering for selling ads, everything else is just
             | PR spin from the Meta thinktanks.
        
               | PaulHoule wrote:
               | They send me surveys which show they have preoccupations
               | which are... weird.
               | 
               | They're not happy to have a successful game store, they
               | want me to use a VR headset to determine my schedule.
               | Which I guess is alright, if I can also access my
               | schedule with a desktop computer or a phone. Why I'd want
               | to use VR to determine my schedule is beyond me, I think
               | a 'minority report' kind of interface could be possible
               | but it is 2025 and you'd think people would expect a
               | conversational recommender that works everywhere.
        
             | reaperducer wrote:
             | Oil companies have been using VR rooms for decades to
             | explore, and understand, and map underground deposits and
             | formations.
             | 
             | (I first saw it in 1999, when it was considered old hat. I
             | can only imagine how much more advanced it's become.)
        
           | qingcharles wrote:
           | When they first showed this off a few years back it was for
           | AI training, e.g. training robots on real world locations.
        
       | alex1138 wrote:
       | A fundamental problem with Metaverse is that their parent
       | companies (Facebook, Insta, and as far as Whatsapp it's a clear
       | antitrust case) don't work
       | 
       | People don't see posts from friends. The site spams you to death.
       | They hijacked your email address, and replaced it with a
       | facebook.com address. They've lied rather a lot about things
       | generally
       | 
       | And that company is now the one presenting a
       | Metaverse/VR/AR/whatever
       | 
       | It should be DOA just based on reputation, never mind the
       | technical merits
        
         | fsiefken wrote:
         | what if they open source the 3d->vr tech, or inspire people to
         | create open source alternatives? it's a net win
        
           | timeon wrote:
           | They already open-sourced React. I consider it net-negative
           | for the web. While nice API for developers, it resulted in
           | slow websites for users.
        
             | alex1138 wrote:
             | And the license controversy
        
       | crashingintoyou wrote:
       | I'm eager to see this become more widely available, at least once
       | such spaces can be shared. Not yet available to me, but hopefully
       | soon.
        
       | nicman23 wrote:
       | so that is why they werent giving access to the color cameras in
       | oculus 3 to apps
       | 
       | i want my point cloud scanner dammit
        
         | andybak wrote:
         | They've relented on that now. There's a (somewhat limited) API
         | for camera access.
        
           | nicman23 wrote:
           | do they give the full output?
        
             | andybak wrote:
             | It's a cropped area. Presumably to keep the bandwidth
             | requirements down. Also limited to 60fps (I recall)
        
               | KaiserPro wrote:
               | its partly privacy, and partly camera constraints.
               | 
               | I don't think any of the cameras run at 90hz, I'm pretty
               | sure the slam cameras run at 25hz, with the IMU doing the
               | rest. (that might have changed, It also may have been
               | 15hz, I can't remember)
               | 
               | Also, again from memory, its been a year since I actually
               | worked on it, the colour camera does some fancy fusion to
               | make a compound image. The images need to be warped
               | properly so that depth is displayed properly.
        
       | jasode wrote:
       | Somewhat related is 3D / LIDAR scanning tech of overlapping photo
       | captures using Matterport: https://matterport.com/
       | 
       | It's popular with real estate agents. Not quite "virtual reality"
       | but it also doesn't need expensive glasses. It does seem like
       | future smartphones with AI may be a decent cheaper substitute for
       | $6000 Matterport cameras.
        
         | PaulHoule wrote:
         | I think the same content could be viewed with either VR
         | headsets or phones or computers, see
         | 
         | https://scaniverse.com/@UP8
        
       | alfiedotwtf wrote:
       | I just hope we'll be able to download and keep our files, rather
       | than have them hold hostage... it would be nice to use this as a
       | personal archival of houses and pass them down like a family
       | album.
       | 
       | Now there's a sad sad thought - imagine if Kodak required monthly
       | subscription to vote your photos
        
       | mabedan wrote:
       | This is the first feature which makes me kind of excited for VR.
       | I live away from my country and my parents for over 20 years and
       | I'd love to be able to sit in my parents' living room, or have
       | them sit in mine and share a moment together. FaceTime is already
       | great, but I can imagine this will feel more intimate.
        
         | ojo-rojo wrote:
         | +1 To add to the experience of connecting to people, I can also
         | imagine our family members taking a photograph together while
         | in VR of the family living room - a memento we can take away.
         | That would work if our VR avatars are realistic representations
         | of ourselves, which I think Meta can do (?)
        
           | lm28469 wrote:
           | This sounds like an absolute nightmare. Technology
           | disconnected us over decades, then gave us "solutions" to
           | stay in touch 24/7, people are lonelier than ever but we keep
           | pushing for more of this shit. You can already call and video
           | call your family, basically for free, what does VR bring to
           | the table ?
           | 
           | "Hey John, grandpa will expire soon can you quickly jump in
           | your headset and upload yourself to his VR cabin in the wood,
           | the one we rent from MetaSpital for $99 a day, to take a
           | selfie with him before he dies alone in a cold hospital room"
        
             | andybak wrote:
             | It's just another way to record a time and place. No more
             | different to a video than a video is to a photo. Just
             | slightly more fidelity.
             | 
             | It's a good thing. It's a nice thing. Chill.
             | 
             | I get that there's reasons to be angry at big tech but this
             | isn't one of them. Accurate and easy 3d scanning, high
             | fidelity rendering and a way to view in 6dof stereoscopic
             | is just a great use case entirely separate from the
             | machinations of our evil overlords.
        
               | lm28469 wrote:
               | And how does a 3d rendered world that doesn't exist
               | anywhere other than in a computer has more fidelity than
               | real life ?
               | 
               | > It's a good thing. It's a nice thing. Chill
               | 
               | That's your opinion, the fact that VR tanked hard seems
               | to indicate most people don't agree
        
               | itsdrewmiller wrote:
               | It has more fidelity than a photograph or a 2d video. No
               | one has claimed it is higher fidelity than real life.
        
               | theshackleford wrote:
               | > And how does a 3d rendered world that doesn't exist
               | anywhere other than in a computer has more fidelity than
               | real life ?
               | 
               | It's not always posible to meet up with people in real
               | life. A lot of my friends moved overseas and I have
               | neither the time nor inclination to be flying to
               | sweden/the USA constantly.
               | 
               | > That's your opinion, the fact that VR tanked hard seems
               | to indicate most people don't agree
               | 
               | This in no way changes the reality of their situation, in
               | fact frankly, its irrelevant. Something being "nice" or
               | "good" does not require it also have mass market appeal.
        
               | skeeter2020 wrote:
               | If this continues the trend of technology discouraging
               | in-person, physical connectedness then it's not an all-
               | good, all-nice thing. It could actually be a very
               | dangerous, very bad thing.
        
             | kakacik wrote:
             | That's an extreme take, venting off some inner fears and
             | frustrations?
             | 
             | There are many use cases where this can add value. People
             | these days live far from their families, what's wrong with
             | connecting in a better/different way if desired?
             | 
             | Not everybody wants or can stay with their families for
             | whole life and that's fine, something about personal
             | freedom and right to self-determination, desire for massive
             | personal growth that exposure to different cultures
             | invariably brings in, adventures and so on.
        
               | lm28469 wrote:
               | > something about personal freedom and right to self-
               | determination
               | 
               | This has to be satire, god emperor Zuck and his megacorp
               | Meta fighting for our personal freedoms and right to
               | self-determination. You're already living in an alternate
               | universe apparently
        
               | jmathai wrote:
               | I used to think this. But as I've aged and grown wiser, I
               | think perhaps everyone should consider the large negative
               | impacts of moving so far away from family. Technology
               | can't solve all the problems.
        
               | diamond559 wrote:
               | It's adding another dimension to video calls, this isn't
               | solving any major problems in the world. It won't bring
               | in billions in revenue either.
        
             | mabedan wrote:
             | I agree with the general sentiment. I also think we forgot
             | how to enjoy quality time together and these "solutions"
             | will make matters worse. But in some scenarios, like what I
             | described, which is just spending time together, it can
             | help
        
             | foobarian wrote:
             | Yeah, pesky technology disconnecting us. Best to go back
             | before cars where nobody could move anywhere. See you
             | Sunday in church
        
         | skeezyjefferson wrote:
         | we are decades away. its why carmack quit to pursue other
         | avenues. the chasm between the state of the art (gaming) and
         | where VR currently is (essentially, mobile) is too big not seem
         | shitty in comparison. The then-recent proliferation of Arm and
         | SoC made the industry think it was possible, they even
         | convinced Carmack, but the bandwidth just isnt there. The
         | innovation required on the software side is massive - so theyll
         | just wait for hardware to get better.
        
           | acka wrote:
           | Would you care to explain what you mean by "the bandwidth
           | just isn't there"? VR is more than just mobile devices; all
           | currently available VR headsets can also do PC VR, whether
           | via a wired DisplayPort link or a wired or wireless network
           | connection.
           | 
           | As I see it, the only absolute upper limit for VR is the
           | resolution and frame rate of the VR headset displays, as well
           | as the quality of the optical stack. Rendering of the
           | graphics can be done by anything from a single high-end GPU
           | in a PC up to a beefy server in the cloud--although in that
           | case, of course, network latency and video compression will
           | impact the experience.
        
         | yibg wrote:
         | Agreed. Both my parents are getting older but live in different
         | cities quite far apart from each other and me. Being able to
         | virtually spend time together would be good if it's realistic
         | enough. During Covid I got into the habit of playing VR games
         | with my father since I wasn't able to physically visit and he
         | was isolated. Not quite the same as being there physically of
         | course but it helped a lot. Something both of us looked forward
         | to.
        
       | bluehat974 wrote:
       | Imagine scanning a cooking courses and be able to move in the
       | space to watch cooking technique in any angles, would be awesome
        
         | lawlessone wrote:
         | That would be magnitudes more data i think. As cheap as storage
         | is i don't think anyone is ready for that.
        
       | throw-10-8 wrote:
       | Its hilarious to me how people in these comments still give Meta
       | the benefit of the doubt and think the core feature of this is
       | anything other than blatant data harvesting.
        
       | ge96 wrote:
       | Hmm I swear I saw something like this demoed. I think it was an
       | independent thing but also think Apple has it too with their VR
       | headset.
        
       | RyanOD wrote:
       | I'm sort of embarrassed to ask this, but what is the point of
       | this (and I'm genuinely asking)?
       | 
       | I get that it can scan a physical space and then I can see a
       | digital reproduction of that space on VR goggles...but then what?
       | Do I just stand there looking around the space?
        
         | plun9 wrote:
         | I guess other people with a headset can view your spaces.
        
         | wlesieutre wrote:
         | I would love to time travel back to some of my old apartments
        
         | dottjt wrote:
         | The huge application for this I think is video games. Instead
         | of having to create every small detail by hand, you can just
         | create the space in real-life and then have that rendered.
        
           | jncfhnb wrote:
           | Can't tell if that's a joke
        
         | baby wrote:
         | Imagine if you could go back and visit all the apartments
         | you've ever lived in. I would pay big for that. That's worth
         | more than a lots of cameras and pictures taken
        
           | skeeter2020 wrote:
           | Unless it adds a rose-colored tint I think you'd quicky
           | realize that time & nostalgia filter out a lot of things and
           | there's a reason you no longer live in that apartment.
        
         | kace91 wrote:
         | As someone who worked in VR a decade ago, I can tell you that
         | the few use cases that were earning us actual money (as opposed
         | to hype and continuous POCs) were niche apps and tools for
         | specific industries.
         | 
         | A common one is VR visits for real estate companies and travel
         | agencies, for example. Also virtual previews for investors and
         | C-suite execs in meetings where there was a ton of money
         | involved - think someone trying to sell the creation of a whole
         | neighbourhood and this is a fancy version of a powerpoint slide
         | for their pitch.
         | 
         | This tech could probably have saved us a good amount of work,
         | though It's still a head scratcher why Zuck thinks this is the
         | one thing in which to bet the company's future.
        
         | skeeter2020 wrote:
         | It seems to recreate the absolute low point for Wade in Ready
         | Player One, when he's deeply unhappy and only has the sort of
         | nostalgia you'll get from a photo-realistic but ultimately
         | empty representation like this.
        
         | qingcharles wrote:
         | Meta has been working on this for a while. I believe one of
         | their primary use cases was for AI training. e.g., to train
         | robots on real world locations before letting them loose.
        
         | bluerooibos wrote:
         | "Visit your local cafe, now in VR. Meet your friends in local
         | spaces, without leaving your home!"
         | 
         | Either way, I don't see this taking off. I'm surprised they're
         | still pursuing VR.
        
       | lurker919 wrote:
       | On one hand, meta has a bad reputation for being a toxic pip
       | factory where employees can be laid off any time. On the other
       | hand, they are consistently coming out with innovations in
       | VR/glasses at a time when the industry is going crazy over openai
       | funny money. Are toxic work practices actually good for
       | innovation?
        
         | w_for_wumbo wrote:
         | Humans can do amazing things when they are pushed to their
         | limits. You can force a human into a position where they
         | innovate for their lives. OR you can create a safe enough
         | environment where their innovation comes out naturally. The
         | second option benefits everyone yet can be harder to do in
         | practice because it requires paying attention and attuning to
         | the needs of the individuals and the collective.
        
       | Towaway69 wrote:
       | Initially read this as hyper escapism but then realised it wasn't
       | about AI, just 3D.
       | 
       | Strange how all the major technologies atm are concerned - at
       | least partly - with escaping reality.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-10-08 23:00 UTC)