Hacker News Reader

Comment by aqme28 | Hacker News Reader

All these "relive your memory" videos are incredibly awkward, because of how downright sad it is to strap this on your head during your kid's birthday just to relive it on repeat like Tom Cruise in Minority Report.

The real usecase is porn, but they're too tactful to say it.

View on HN

Yeah, if this thing catches on, I think this will be my "old man gets left behind by technology" moment. Everything I see from the marketing of this just looks like a soulless dystopia. I hate it.

If the future is strapping a phone to your face and never leaving the house, I'm ready to be left in the past.

You're going to lose days at a time in the retirement home to VR tiktok and VR candy crush.

Jokes aside, assisted living homes are exactly the place where XR is finding adoption - entertainment and healthcare for people who can’t readily leave.

Is that much worse than becoming enraged by 24 news cycles on daytime TV? I feel like reliving family memories and virtual travel/experiences could be quite positive for older people.

I am fairly cautious about tech in my own life but this still seems like an extreme Black Mirror episode take. The battery doesn’t even last long enough to have you never leave your house. It seems like something I might use two hours of my day maybe. I’m not sure how that makes it worse than any other media device or what it is about it that has people thinking they’ll never leave home again and feel completely socially isolated. I’m just considering the case of using it at home though and not walking around with it expecting people to interact with me normally.

Why wouldn't you use this in place of working on your computer, and then leave it behind when you go outdoors? Sounds pretty reasonable to me.

I played around a lot with VR180 when it came out. The experience is incredibly, almost uncomfortably intimate for personal videos. I felt so awkward watching demos of other peoples “blow out the birthday candles” moments. However, the fact that it was uncomfortable means that the technology itself is very good, otherwise it couldn’t produce such and emotional experience.

On the tech side, I’m just guessing, but it looks like Apple has an even better version of VR189. A 6dof version of VR180 seems entirely plausible for Apple to pull off with NeRFs and would be even more incredible.

Again, I agree that it’s a bit weird for personal memories, both on the recording side (possibly awkward to wear goggles in those situations) and even watching personal memories.

However, I’d expect Apple to make recording spatial videos possible w iPhone/iPad, which at least fixes the awkward recording issue.

Even with that possibility, I think Apple hurt themselves using this “personal memory spatial video” example.

For me, the far better use cases are for entertainment. Professional, live (and recorded) spatial video will be huge. Everyone can have front row, court side, or even birds-eye views of all forms of in-person entertainment. Sports, plays, comedy, concerts, orchestras. The experience of watching it is so intimate experientially I think it will be amazing. Looks like the tech to make it happen is finally here. Imagine them owning “the App Store” for spatial video pay-per-view…

Excited to see where this goes!

If you go to any concert or other public event, half of the audience will be recording on their smartphone instead of watching. I do not see any reason why an iphone of tomorrow won’t have a 3D camera to record and share any important moments the same way as we do it now. There will be the time when we will watch dashcam and drone videos of car crashes, natural disasters and soldiers dying on battlefield sitting on a sofa in those shiny glasses.

I'm hoping they're going to do this, but without them saying so, it makes me worry they created something amazing but with poor execution.

Nobody is strapping this headset on for their kid’s birthday party. There are incredible concert videos from professional crews, and that’s the direction this will go until the tech can be (if ever) made unobtrusive.

The primary purpose of this headset is not a recording device even if it can record, so I do not really see a point in your comment. Most of content creation will happen by other means.

I was responding to your comment and the parent comment both asserted that people would be using this device to record live concerts or their kid’s birthday party (which we, apparently, agree is silly).

I can see a daft punk revival concert where everyone is wearing a helmet

But is this really what we want ? Do we want to encourage people to do even more of that ?

Moloch doesn't care what you want, it cares what the system wants.

Seems like hyperbole, IIRC the recent concert I went to people used their phones for a few photos/videos to post on social media a few clips that they were there basically, and then mostly enjoyed the performance.

This is where the 3D aspect is cool. The same way that we look at old newsreels and feel sort of chronologically alienated by how "retro" they look - simply because of the medium - the 2D recordings we are making nowadays will similarly look quaint to people that have become used to 3D. So, Vision Pro has the opportunity to set the tone for the next generation of fundamental media experience.

People keep bringing this up, but are we really trying to compare a small rectangle that fits in your pocket and takes 3 button clicks to take a picture with (double power + volume button) to a full on VR headset strapped to your head?

The apple fanaticism on this site is really something special, I see no universe in which an idiotic product like this is touted as even somewhat desirable if it didn't have the Apple logo plastered on top of it (with the associated ludicrous price tag)

Will my comment be more clear if I will rephrase it in simpler words? Vision Pro can record, but it is not a recording device for the most use cases. Something else will come either from Apple or from 3rd party vendors, probably in a format of a 3D camera in a smartphone. And when such devices will come to the market, people are going to use them the same way they did it before (see Instagram and TikTok for examples). That’s it.

I’m not Apple fan or insider, but what would you do if you were Apple and if you do not have or do not want to disclose the existence of more suitable recording devices? You would probably use the same glasses for the demo, right?

> All these "relive your memory" videos are incredibly awkward, because of how downright sad it is to strap this on your head during your kid's birthday just to relive it on repeat like Tom Cruise in Minority Report.

I mean, quite obviously the recording tech will be a standalone device (and maybe even an iPhone which are ubiquitous at these events already) someday. The Vision headset has all the hardware already so why not let it capture videos? Just set it on the counter or something...

This has become one of those meme-y dismissals that I see in all the discussions but it's so transitory I can't imagine it possibly mattering.

If you read the article, you'll see him mention this as well, and also call out that it uses some "Apple Immersive Video Format" (which is something I didn't hear in the keynote), so this is the clear intention.

I was thinking the same thing. Aren’t iPhones getting lidar? One will just record on an iPhone. Why is a person recording using a headset more dystopian than using an iPhone or camcorder? Camcorders were way more bulky and isolating than this headset will be.

Is it that different from using one of those gigantic camcorders from the 80’s where you had to put one eye up to a viewer stalk? People used those, but it’s not like they had it out the entire event (I assume, based on how short the videos I’ve seen taken with them usually are).

That's exactly what I'm thinking. SLR's and camcorders were always big bulky things that covered your face when using them.

This isn't much different from that.

It is slightly different in a better way. You can interact, engage and otherwise participate in events while recording using the headset than you can with a camcorder or phone. I'm guessing, but obviously don't know, that Apple let's people "see" your eyes while you use the headset because it makes it more natural for others to interact with you while you are using the headset.

Even the clip with recording the kids felt awkward as the kids did not ackowledge the presence of the parent at all. It felt they were Photoshopped into an empty movie.

Recording using an iPhone would an upgrade as your kids can now much better see your facial expressions and you would be able to turn around to make a "selfie" recording showing both you and the kids in the movie.

There’s lots of rumors that an upcoming iPhone model will include 3D recording.

Yup that will make perfect sense.

Once Apple has a 3D playback device, adding another camera bump at the bottom of the phone won't be terribly hard. I just wonder if it'll be a pair of regular lenses or fisheye lenses.

If you have more than one person recording the same event with an iPhone, uploading them all into one place would enable pretty precise photogrammetry to render the scene in detailed 3D.

That’s exactly the sort of complicated-behind-the-scenes technology that Apple is great at wrapping in a simple UI and clever name.

Bingo!

> The real usecase is porn, but they're too tactful to say it.

I don't know why people keep projecting their own desires onto others, lol.

Leaving personal desires out of it, the relationship of porn and tech goes back at least to VHS vs Betamax, probably further. It’s not unreasonable to believe that does not stop with XR headsets.

Sure, but what's the relationship post Blu-Ray? Serving video in general has been important, but not pornography in particular. Ridiculous to say porn is the real usecase. If you have some articles about how porn in particular has driven cutting edge tech please do share. My understanding is that it's been more military, video games and space that have driven cutting edge tech (along with serving ads, of course).

Porn was the use-case behind the invention of internet payments.

Why are so many people (outwardly) against porn when it's one of the biggest digital markets in the world?

> Porn was the use-case behind the invention of internet payments.

Link? My understanding was that it was online banking and ecommerce. Also, I don't know how you got any negative sentiment about porn from my post lol

Weird (mostly American) puritanism.

Considering how hostile the whole financial industry is to that market segment I kinda seriously doubt that. eBay and PayPal propped each other up, Amazon normalized online shopping. It’s a little odd to me that you’re so set on putting porn at the center of everything in some strange Disney/marvel retconning attempt.

Anecdotally, everyone I know with a VR headset (all of about 5 people) is quite open that porn was one reason for the purchase.

The claim isn’t that porn drives technical advances the way space does, but that porn drives consumer adoption of new tech. If a new product category does X, Y, and Z, some percentage of people will buy it. If it does X, Y, Z, and porn, it’s going to sell to a bigger audience and probably make people more forgiving of shortcomings (ha) doing X, Y, and/or Z.

> but that porn drives consumer adoption of new tech

sure. where's the evidence? anything that can serve video can serve porn. where's evidence that porn in particular is somehow unique? YouTube for example as more active users than all porn sites combined, yet porn is not even available on YouTube.

being able to play videos in XR I think will be a real use-case, but this idea that porn in particular is the real usecase is probably wrong, imho. this is not to say that people won't use it for that.

The most dramatic case is older — VHS literally won because of porn.

And there was video porn long before YouTube was founded. The claim is that porn drove people to get computers capable of showing video, to buy internet connections fast enough for video, etc. It is not that video sites must serve porn, but that the grassroots interest in porn created the market conditions that made YouTube possible.

It’s hard to substantiate because how would you? Other than just having lived through that time and observed (VHS was before my time, but The DVD market was similar).

Maybe that era has stopped and horny people are no longer seeking out the newest best way to consume porn, and technology is now pure. I’m just not seeing it, but maybe that’s my cultural bubble.

why are we discussing 50 year old tech. if porn is so amazing a use case surely there's something in the past 10 years you can point to? also, I looked and did not see anything substantiating your statement that VHS beat betamax because of porn.

the reasons I remember and corroborated online were due to longer playback time and cheaper playback devices and more content, which was the result of the cheaper production costs.

I don't know how in the world you got "porn is an amazing use case". I just said it influences purchasing decisions in ways that prepare markets for more mass-market scenarios.

I also don't think you looked super hard since a Google search for "betamax vhs porn" turns up nothing but arguments for (and in some cases, against) the proposition.

> to VHS vs Betamax, probably further

definitely to Polaroid: taking sexy pictures and not having to show them to the film development shop was big, I am told.

Apple is famously anti-porn, and enforces this policy in their App Store. What are the chances that apps/content for this device won't be as locked-down or more locked-down as the App Store?

Does it matter? You watch through the web. It's just video playback whether 2D or VR.

Do you think nobody is consuming porn on iPhones?

Sexual desire is pretty universally human, not personal.

Its not projection, rather well known cases that specifically porn enabled technologies like VHS to gather mass adoption, even over technologically superior tech.

Like it or not, doesn't matter if on extreme left or right or anywhere in between, people en masse like it. That they often don't admit it publicly is another topic. Can't beat a billion years of evolution baked into the very foundation of each of us.

Yes but this isn't VHS. When's the last time porn was the major driving factor? You're about the 70s and 80s - might as well be an entirety ago as far as tech is concerned.

People thinking porn is going to be what drives adoption of this are insane. It'll most likely be productivity and vertical integration.

This is how you know you're in an engineer bubble.

Average people care much less about productivity than you think.

Or, here's a wild thought, the whole device will get smaller....And standalone cameras will exist. So it wont be awkward, as it will just appear to be glasses on your head that we've not found awkward in the last several hundred years.

> So it wont be awkward, as it will just appear to be glasses on your head that we've not found awkward in the last several hundred years.

That’s what Google Glass tried and it flopped anyway. People also found a camera on glasses (like the Google Glass version) to be highly creepy. Apple emphasized that the front of these glasses will clearly indicate when someone’s taking a photo or video (to the subjects who’re seeing it).

Google Glass wasn't given a chance. They axed it as soon as people started complaining about being nervous around ppl with it on rather than change anything.

Thus the idea to make the user's eyes visible on the front screen.

We are in a much different world then when google glass showed up. People taking pictures, videos, streaming is now much more commonplace. There was near no external indicator of taking a picture on google glass.

I also dont forsee this device being used outside often at first.

Google glass also flopped for many other reasons, it being uncomfortable, awkward, and abandoned quickly being some.

That controversy is an interesting thing to reflect on. I remember it seemed very concerning at the time, but now I feel that much the bigger privacy concern is not being recorded in third person in public by strangers, but platform owners recording what I see and do with the headset. Tracking my eyes to know what I pay attention to. Etc.

> People also found a camera on glasses (like the Google Glass version) to be highly creepy.

I knew someone who wore Google Glass all day every day, they worked on my floor.

It wasn't creepy, nobody ever reported feeling uncomfortable at all. It was merely extremely dorky.

Probably somewhat akin to the people who used to wear BlueTooth earpieces vs people with AirPods/similar in now.

Apple has the walled garden approach to apps, and they don’t let porn in. (Except for reddit app, which has porn allowed, to the complaints of Tumblr)

But maybe it will be possible through the Safari browser or something.

The only thing an app needs to do is replay videos. No adult designation required.

I think the key will be if they can make it so the next generation of iPhones can record videos for Apple Vision. If they cannot do that, I think they're really goofing up.

Yes, i would bet on the next generation of iphones having this capability

It feels like a missed opportunity that the current generation doesn't already do that. All the talk is that Apple have been exploring VR behind the scenes for a while, and the devices all have 2+ lenses.

It would have been quite cool for them to announce that all your iPhone 14 videos were actually recorded in 3D and ready for Apple Vision all along.

I think 3D photos will catch on, but you'll take the photos with your phone, like you do now. This device will really be for viewing them later.

(iPhone 15 or 16 will include the ability to "...take spectacular 3D photos that are incredible when viewed with a Vision Pro!!!" -- sorry, that quote is me imagining an Apple presenter at a future iPhone event.)

Porn and games are often what drive new tech forward.

So it does seem like a VR/AR device fully focused on those use cases could be good for pushing the tech forward. Won't be Apple that does that, though.

Side note, it's so interesting that GPUs were pulled forward by gaming, and then GPUs ended up becoming a key enabler in AI.

The games part I get. For the right game, made explicitly for VR it does improve how immersive it feels.

The video part I don't understand at all. I've never watched a VR video that made me go "wow, I've gotta watch all videos in VR now." I found it annoying, the scale is weird, an annoying headset, with less freedom to view what's going on that a traditional tv.

I suspect the capture technology will eventually find its way to iPhone/iPad, with the best replay experience reserved for the Vision product line.

This removes the awkwardness of the capture experience, and creates demand for the Vision device.

I expect they'll announce that the phone will be able to record 3D video at some point. But they didn't want to announce that yesterday because it would give away future iPhone plans. They should probably have left it out altogether.

Is weird why he said that when a video or photo serves the exact same purpose, to view and relive past memories except in 2D. The world has been doing it it for a century

Can't you do that already with a 360 camera?

VR porn is generally meh, no? It's a nice gimmick but is it really better beyond the novely factor?

3d video would capture depth, so not really the same thing as 360 degree video. Think moving your head and seeing in 3D from that new perspective and feeling the depth, vs just being able to look in all directions (in 2D)

pretty sure capturing "spatial video" will come to the iPhone.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com