3 ms·

The difference is ChatGPT is objectively better in every possible measure compared to what was available in the past with zero downsides to using it instead of

by pr0zac 3y ago

The difference is ChatGPT is objectively better in every possible measure compared to what was available in the past with zero downsides to using it instead of old stuff. It’s also a lot better. VR so far only offers experiences that are moderately better in some ways (bigger screen, more immersive experience) while being objectively worse in others (heavy sweaty headset, lower resolution, nausea/headaches, high cost or be locked into a FB run ecosystem). It won’t explode the way LLMs and other AI has lately until it solves the negative factors it has. I say this as someone who uses VR regularly and figured most of this out from feedback from my normie friends and family.

ethbr0 3y ago
Exactly. Revolutions usually happen because the friction to adoption is near-zero. If so, your benefits can even be modest! The cost of using ChatGPT vs older chatbots was... nothing. Once there are downsides, people weigh them and you lose chunks of your potential adoption base.
curiousllama 3y ago
You’re using 2 different measuring sticks. Oculus Pro is objectively better in all possible ways than other VR headsets (but has trade offs vs substitutes, like regular screens). ChatGPT is objectively better in all possible ways than other chatbots (but has trade offs vs substitutes, like google search).
- pr0zac 3y ago
  That comparison is wrong too though, the importance isn’t the “things” it’s the experiences and use cases those things provide. VR headsets provide “large scale 2D experiences” and “immersive 3D experiences”. The resolutions on all VR headsets means for the first it’s objectively worse in a lot of ways, namely fidelity and detail. I agree the second one is a new experience and use case (I really like VR and have two different headsets I use regularly), but the only actual new thing is the “3D” part. People find plenty of other stuff immersive. Heck books provide that for a lot of people. That 3D part just isn’t enough, you can ask all of my friends and family that have tried my Index, said “wow that’s really cool” and then never buy a headset themselves. ChatGPT provides a bunch of new use cases with regard to chat, text editing/manipulation/analysis, and knowledge recall/generation while also being significantly better and faster than Google with regard to finding answers or information. Meanwhile AI image generation has completely changed art and image creation to a ridiculous degree. I have friends and family asking me how concerned they should be about AI taking their jobs in fields as varied as writing, art/design, law, and medicine. I do think in the future VR could reach the point where it’s that revolutionary, I just don’t feel like the two compare well now. VR is currently more like those old chatbots mentioned.

by pr0zac 3y ago

ethbr0 3y ago

Exactly. Revolutions usually happen because the friction to adoption is near-zero. If so, your benefits can even be modest! The cost of using ChatGPT vs older chatbots was... nothing. Once there are downsides, people weigh them and you lose chunks of your potential adoption base.

curiousllama 3y ago

You’re using 2 different measuring sticks. Oculus Pro is objectively better in all possible ways than other VR headsets (but has trade offs vs substitutes, like regular screens). ChatGPT is objectively better in all possible ways than other chatbots (but has trade offs vs substitutes, like google search).

pr0zac 3y ago
That comparison is wrong too though, the importance isn’t the “things” it’s the experiences and use cases those things provide. VR headsets provide “large scale 2D experiences” and “immersive 3D experiences”. The resolutions on all VR headsets means for the first it’s objectively worse in a lot of ways, namely fidelity and detail. I agree the second one is a new experience and use case (I really like VR and have two different headsets I use regularly), but the only actual new thing is the “3D” part. People find plenty of other stuff immersive. Heck books provide that for a lot of people. That 3D part just isn’t enough, you can ask all of my friends and family that have tried my Index, said “wow that’s really cool” and then never buy a headset themselves. ChatGPT provides a bunch of new use cases with regard to chat, text editing/manipulation/analysis, and knowledge recall/generation while also being significantly better and faster than Google with regard to finding answers or information. Meanwhile AI image generation has completely changed art and image creation to a ridiculous degree. I have friends and family asking me how concerned they should be about AI taking their jobs in fields as varied as writing, art/design, law, and medicine. I do think in the future VR could reach the point where it’s that revolutionary, I just don’t feel like the two compare well now. VR is currently more like those old chatbots mentioned.