4 ms·

Zuck is hellbent on convincing us that whatever he believes, is correct. And mostly what he believes is whatever can make him money.

Bellend 4y ago
Reminds me of Elon Musk. I think it's a new category where a handful of people announce vapourware and billions flood in to back it with money but none of it exists in reality.
- 0x445442 4y ago
  I don't know, reducing Trans-Atlantic network latency and bringing high speed internet to millions in currently un-served areas around the world while at the same time giving me an alternative to Cox seems worth while. Oh and being able to tweet that I think the benefit/cost ratio of mRNA vaccines is less than one for most people will be kind of cool as well.
  - vba616 4y ago
    >bringing high speed internet to millions in currently un-served areas around the world Not that that's bad in itself, but in today's news: "Elon Musk personally rejected a Ukrainian request to extend his satellite internet service to Crimea" Doing things that nobody else can gives you power nobody else has.
    - noncoml 4y ago
      Alternative to Cox? I don’t think you have actually tried Starlink, otherwise you wouldn’t say that. For me, bandwidth is between 60Mbps and 100Mbps. Latency 50-100ms. But the worst is how unreliable it is. Muktisecond blackouts many times during the day and subsecond time-outs many times per hour. SSH over Starlink is pretty painful. In best case it’s an alternative to wireless service providers, but otherwise I would get a stable reliable 25Mbps DSL over Starlink any day.
      - coverj 4y ago
        Just in the interest of balance I am very happy with Starlink, I usually range between 90-120Mbps and 30-60ms latency. It can be a little patchy to play latency sensitive games on (guessing these are the sub seconds timeouts you mention), I swap to tethering my phone for that but day to day (zoom meetings, etc) I have found starlink to be a massive upgrade on the alternatives available in Australia. In 12~ months as a customer I think I've tethered my phone for a zoom call once.
GianFabien 4y ago
Zuck rejects your reality and substitutes his own. (with apologies to Adam Savage)
ilaksh 4y ago
I know that people love to deride Zuckerberg and Facebook, but he is completely correct. Its just not obvious to people because the headsets are bulky and awkward and the virtual reality is not very real yet. But the new headset is a big improvement in terms of comfort and performance. But as they shrink down and become more capable, VR/AR headsets, goggles, glasses will almost certainly be the preferred interface for a majority of people within 5 years or so. If I had an extra $1500 to spend on the Quest Pro now I would, and would try to use it to replace my screen with virtual screens. Might still be too uncomfortable but I will try it out. To start to understand, think about whether you would like 3 free 42" monitors that could magically hover over your desk. Or if you would like to be able to teleport to your friend's house without actually moving. Within a decade, using completely 2d interfaces for many computing tasks will be outdated. People will interact with 3d widgets and representations. A lot of the trendiest places to meet will be completely realistic locations in virtual or mixed reality.
- a257 4y ago
  What can 3d interfaces do better that they replace 2D interfaces as the preferred medium for digital activity? Are those benefits worth the additional costs of producing, distributing, and interacting with 3D content? The argument that VR/AR is a boon restrained only by current technological ability seems to be incomplete. Rather, could there be some other economic, cultural, and practical factors which make VR/AR unappetizing outside its niche use cases? (EG, why did 3D television "fail" despite being available for a long time?) I don't personally believe that 3D will eventually replace 2D because I know I wouldn't want to develop 3D content when 2D is a chore already. If 3D will replace 2D in some point in the future there should be a greater emphasis on developing technologies to make creating 3D content as easy (if not easier) as creating 2D content.
  - ilaksh 4y ago
    I said it would replace it for many computing tasks not all or all content.
dang 4y ago
Please don't post unsubstantive comments, shallow dismissals, or personal attacks to HN. You may not feel you owe $CEO better, but you owe this community better if you're participating in it. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Bellend 4y ago

Reminds me of Elon Musk. I think it's a new category where a handful of people announce vapourware and billions flood in to back it with money but none of it exists in reality.

0x445442 4y ago
I don't know, reducing Trans-Atlantic network latency and bringing high speed internet to millions in currently un-served areas around the world while at the same time giving me an alternative to Cox seems worth while. Oh and being able to tweet that I think the benefit/cost ratio of mRNA vaccines is less than one for most people will be kind of cool as well.
- vba616 4y ago
  >bringing high speed internet to millions in currently un-served areas around the world Not that that's bad in itself, but in today's news: "Elon Musk personally rejected a Ukrainian request to extend his satellite internet service to Crimea" Doing things that nobody else can gives you power nobody else has.
  - noncoml 4y ago
    Alternative to Cox? I don’t think you have actually tried Starlink, otherwise you wouldn’t say that. For me, bandwidth is between 60Mbps and 100Mbps. Latency 50-100ms. But the worst is how unreliable it is. Muktisecond blackouts many times during the day and subsecond time-outs many times per hour. SSH over Starlink is pretty painful. In best case it’s an alternative to wireless service providers, but otherwise I would get a stable reliable 25Mbps DSL over Starlink any day.
    - coverj 4y ago
      Just in the interest of balance I am very happy with Starlink, I usually range between 90-120Mbps and 30-60ms latency. It can be a little patchy to play latency sensitive games on (guessing these are the sub seconds timeouts you mention), I swap to tethering my phone for that but day to day (zoom meetings, etc) I have found starlink to be a massive upgrade on the alternatives available in Australia. In 12~ months as a customer I think I've tethered my phone for a zoom call once.

GianFabien 4y ago

Zuck rejects your reality and substitutes his own. (with apologies to Adam Savage)

ilaksh 4y ago

I know that people love to deride Zuckerberg and Facebook, but he is completely correct. Its just not obvious to people because the headsets are bulky and awkward and the virtual reality is not very real yet. But the new headset is a big improvement in terms of comfort and performance. But as they shrink down and become more capable, VR/AR headsets, goggles, glasses will almost certainly be the preferred interface for a majority of people within 5 years or so. If I had an extra $1500 to spend on the Quest Pro now I would, and would try to use it to replace my screen with virtual screens. Might still be too uncomfortable but I will try it out. To start to understand, think about whether you would like 3 free 42" monitors that could magically hover over your desk. Or if you would like to be able to teleport to your friend's house without actually moving. Within a decade, using completely 2d interfaces for many computing tasks will be outdated. People will interact with 3d widgets and representations. A lot of the trendiest places to meet will be completely realistic locations in virtual or mixed reality.

a257 4y ago
What can 3d interfaces do better that they replace 2D interfaces as the preferred medium for digital activity? Are those benefits worth the additional costs of producing, distributing, and interacting with 3D content? The argument that VR/AR is a boon restrained only by current technological ability seems to be incomplete. Rather, could there be some other economic, cultural, and practical factors which make VR/AR unappetizing outside its niche use cases? (EG, why did 3D television "fail" despite being available for a long time?) I don't personally believe that 3D will eventually replace 2D because I know I wouldn't want to develop 3D content when 2D is a chore already. If 3D will replace 2D in some point in the future there should be a greater emphasis on developing technologies to make creating 3D content as easy (if not easier) as creating 2D content.
- ilaksh 4y ago
  I said it would replace it for many computing tasks not all or all content.

dang 4y ago

Please don't post unsubstantive comments, shallow dismissals, or personal attacks to HN. You may not feel you owe $CEO better, but you owe this community better if you're participating in it. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html