3 ms·

I’m so confused by this argument. Why do people think that gait and biometrics data is so valuable for running ads? Trust me, there are millions more features t

I’m so confused by this argument. Why do people think that gait and biometrics data is so valuable for running ads? Trust me, there are millions more features that are more closely predictive that top ML models are just leaving on the table before you get to “what’s your eye saccade rate”. Also, while Meta’s track record is horrendous, they actually have done an okay job at locking down how data is used internally. New use cases are very heavily scrutinized, it’s the old grandfathered ones you should focus on, not new ones from VR. Also, Quest isn’t cheap because it will eventually collect ads data, it’s cheap because social VR, the main Meta argument, requires adoption. It’s a multibillion dollar bet that enough people will have it that it’ll be less friction.

moffkalast 4y ago
> while Meta’s track record is horrendous, they actually have done an okay job at locking down how data is used internally Taking you at your word any of that's even true, even broken clock and all that. We're talking about the company that managed to track people without them even having to use any of their services. But in the end there's no reason to believe they won't just sell it to 3rd parties further down the line like they've done multiple times in the past. If they collect it and can't use it for ads that's even more of a reason to sell it and recoup at least something on the dev time invested on implementing the tracking. > Quest isn’t cheap because it will eventually collect ads data, it’s cheap because social VR, the main Meta argument, requires adoption It's been cheap for years, way before Meta even existed. Unless ol' Zuck has had this planned for that long.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]