I'm confused, are you arguing that video calls are not a primary communication tool? If avatar based comms became as common as video calls I'd consider that a p

I'm confused, are you arguing that video calls are not a primary communication tool? If avatar based comms became as common as video calls I'd consider that a primary tool. Besides, the idea is not that this would meaningfully displace existing media (except perhaps video for some use-cases), but provide a fundamentally new medium for communication that has no present day analog other than face-to-face. Much like current tools, you'd use it when it is the ideal context and situation for it to be maximally useful. Video calls and other media have distinct tradeoffs, and are objectively worse than face-to-face along a variety of dimensions. The argument is simple, if you believe: - people value face-to-face over existing digital communication tools for certain contexts - VR and AR based communication meaningfully approaches face-to-face in certain ways that existing tools do not - VR and AR technology will eventually get to a point where it is ubiquitous Then it seems that tech will be used for those purposes. Either of the latter two assumptions could be wrong, but early research [1] supports the argument of first, and based upon the tech track the second seems highly likely. [1] https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3173574.3173863 https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3173574.3173863