12 ms·

Apple Vision Pro Successor Not Expected Until End of 2026

29 points by williamstein 2y ago

godzillabrennus 2y ago
There must be dozens of people who care if they keep releasing new versions by now.
- blitzar 2y ago
  They are all tech journalists or influencers looking for their next viral hit.
gary_0 2y ago
The technology to make a broadly appealing product is a lot further away than 2 years. With the Vision Pro, they made the VR equivalent of the Apple Newton. The "iPhone moment" is a long way away (assuming VR will ever even have mainstream appeal, which is definitely not guaranteed). The current tech available is just too clunky, slow, power-hungry, and expensive. And it just plain needs to look cooler than a weird pair of ski goggles.
- rowanG077 2y ago
  How doesn't vr have mainstream appeal right now? There are a ton of headsets available. It was 23 billion dollar market in 2023.
  - cpldcpu 2y ago
    >It was 23 billion dollar market in 2023. How is that possible? Assuming an ASP of $333 USD (which is too high), this would be >70mio sold headsets?
    - rowanG077 2y ago
      That's possible because it's a mainstream market.
      - cedilla 2y ago
        If the $23 billion number is correct it's about 8-12% of the gaming market. Less market share (and less revenue) than 3D TVs had in its heyday (about 12 years ago). Yet you can't even get a new 3D TV today. So just having a big number doesn't mean anything for the future. Statista has about 11 million sold VR headsets sold last year. That's not mainstream, that's a niche.
        rowanG077 2y ago
        MacBooks sold 21.9 million last year. I doubt I see anyone calling that niche.
        justinator 2y ago
        But MacBooks have sold in the millions/year now for essentially 33 years,
        dijit 2y ago
        I dont want to argue semantics, but a broad statement like this implies that all units sold are still in service. These things follow a curve, for laptops theres steep drop offs at 3, 5 and 8 years. 98% of 3 year old devices 60% of 5 year old devices 5% of 8y old devices. So you’d need to apply a sliding scale. Macbooks feel pretty ubiquitous, you cant use the entire 33y run of Macbooks to imply that the demographic is an order of magnitude more than what the parent implied.
        justinator 2y ago
        Not semantics, but if you think of examples of at least pop culture that we think of as being in the mainstream, it's about staying power of the genre. For example let's take Rock 'n Roll. When it really became popular -- say Elvis gyrating those hips -- he alone sold 10 million records in a year. And critics then talked of it as a fad that would die out. Elvis would continue to record, continue to sell millions, but eventually - well he died, but rock 'n roll the idea, the genre lived on. In fact rock 'n roll songs were written about how it will always rock 'n roll in defience of the "fad" label. And ~fifty/sixty years later, there are still rock 'n roll bands selling millions/records/year. Not Elvis but the genre remains. We can't quite compare records sales now anymore because physical media just isn't sold really anymore. That "staying power" isn't something VR headsets have (yet). Laptops have that. Critics say that VR is a fad and I think that's more what they mean. They say more critical things as well, but that's sort of the gist. Another example is the automobile: “[Motor cars] have the appearance of a fad, and an extremely dirty, dusty, inconvenient fad… These crude impracticable machines are unlikely for many years to displace in the Englishman’s affection a fine trotting horse and a smart trap.” -- Anonymous Horserider It's too soon to tell with VR headsets, but their limited capability, high price, and well: relative usefulessness seems not in their favor.
    - iwontberude 2y ago
      If you look at Meta's sales numbers it looks like they've sold 20 million headsets alone as of a couple months ago, so maybe its close but not quite? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39374031 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39374031
      - cpldcpu 2y ago
        https://www.statista.com/statistics/677096/vr-headsets-worldwide/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/677096/vr-headsets-world... This seems to be inconsistent with these numbers
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - rickdeckard 2y ago
    If that's true the markets outside of US would have to account for more than 30x of US sales, which I wouldn't expect to happen until every 2nd Chinese household has one... "Sales of VR headsets and augmented reality glasses in the U.S. plummeted nearly 40% to $664 million in 2023, as of Nov. 25, according to data shared with CNBC by research firm Circana." [1] [1] https://www.cnbc.com/2023/12/19/vr-market-shrinking-as-meta-pours-billions-of-dollars-into-metaverse.html https://www.cnbc.com/2023/12/19/vr-market-shrinking-as-meta-...
- jillesvangurp 2y ago
  I think it's not a hardware problem but a content problem. People are shooting for perfect with the hardware and meanwhile nobody is really bothering with the content much. It's all limited to games, 3D movies, and some gimmicky things that are a combination of awkward and not that exciting. Apple has some interesting conceptual stuff but in the end you end up using a lot of 2D stuff that gets projected in front of you. It's nice but not really that valuable. The problem with the vision pro isn't that it's not good enough but that good enough content to justify the expense is lacking. It would be more popular if it were cheaper. But even the Meta Quest, which is a lot cheaper, has the same problem so far.
  - zarzavat 2y ago
    The content will come once the hardware is cheap and sold in volume. Generative AI will help by making it much cheaper to generate 3D content. Current models are still very rough, in the future we will have text-to-HD 3D asset.
    - jillesvangurp 2y ago
      Why would you buy the hardware though? The Meta Quest is cheap already (cheaper than a high end smartphone). And some people buy it of course but it's not really creating a new market of content generation so far. It's too much of a niche market for that.
  - quartesixte 2y ago
    And with growing rumblings of people wanting to be “offline” more and more, promotions of “digital well-being/health”, and GenZ and GenAlphas’ increasing appetite with tactile, physical objects (with 90s/early 00s flair), I don’t see how “stick a screen to your face even closer and live completely digitally” is going to do well. Not until there is an absolute killer app/use case for VR Software. Games that allow for player movement based on thought-input? Social hangouts that are seamless but also private (the groupchat cannot be spoken aloud!)? We need better hardware too. Seamless AR/VR transition with featherweight hardware that does not induce motion sickness if put on or calibrated incorrectly all for $999. Yeah we got a LONG way to go. A bit of a tangent but as much as “the children” are terminally online, I get the feeling the GenX/Millennial product people have a slight misread on what that looks like.
- detourdog 2y ago
  It’s a chicken and egg problem. The Mac 128 was considered useless by experts and useful for people who only knew typewriters. I think the vision pro exists simple to introduce the user interface. I don’t expect to cret anything with mass appeal with the vision pro. I want to experience the environment to experience it and see how the experience can be leveraged. The physical form factor is a big hurdle. They may as well improve it by 10x before version 2.
ein0p 2y ago
All they really need to do for me to purchase one is add multiple user support. I’m sorry, I’m just not going to buy such an expensive device for each person in my family no matter how awesome it is. For Apple this is a trivial fix.
- dwaite 2y ago
  Even ignoring the software side, the current hardware leverages several sized components to get proper fit / focal length. I don't think it is really marketable as multi-user unless you can have it adjust to a face/head without juggling parts.
  - ein0p 2y ago
    I’m ok with swapping magnetically attached parts.
  - philshem 2y ago
    iPadOS isn’t multi-user either, and that is pure software.
    - ein0p 2y ago
      It’s less than one third the cost though.
    - wpm 2y ago
      iPad absolutely is multiuser. There are schools all over the world using Shared iPad. The OS is and always has been multi user, just like the OS it was based on was and still is.
      - gardenhedge 2y ago
        My iPad only allows one user..
        wpm 2y ago
surfingdino 2y ago
Next try in 35 years? The future of VR is as bright, as it has always been and always will be. For perspective, read https://www.nytimes.com/1989/04/10/business/for-artificial-reality-wear-a-computer.html https://www.nytimes.com/1989/04/10/business/for-artificial-r... A lot of problems have been solved since 1989, but I see its future in military applications. The rest of the world does not have the problems that VR helmets solve.
- bluescrn 2y ago
  The problem they may solve is ‘the real world is increasingly bleak’. When living in ever-smaller homes with minimal personal space and accelerating urban decay outside, with decreasing access to transport to escape the cities, escaping to virtual spaces is likely to become more desirable.
  - justinator 2y ago
    But VR headsets are as much as an escape as drugs are and that's not an exit, but more like a trap. As in: you are not entrapped within it, without actually improving anything in your life.
  - wpm 2y ago
    Why would I need to “escape” my city?
  - asadotzler 2y ago
    Living space isn't shrinking fast enough to save the Apple Vision Pro. We're talking 10% shrink over 20 or 30 years. That's just not gonna be the tipping point for enough people to drop their glorious 86" QNED/QLED TVs and their 32" 4k @ 240Hz QD-OLED gaming monitors, which can be had for less than the price of an AVP, certainly not in time to save it.
justinator 2y ago
It's probably going to be cancelled, re-imagined, relaunched - this thing is a dud. But that's not end of '26. That's going to be whenever Cook steps down, which honestly could be in the next few years.
CaptainFever 2y ago
I feel like I wouldn't want the Apple Vision Pro until they open up the OS; it is way too restricted right now, like iPad OS. Is this a reasonable concern?
- SushiHippie 2y ago
  Is there a difference between iOS and iPadOS in regards of restrictions, or why do you mention iPadOS specifically?
  - jitl 2y ago
    Vision Pro runs iPad apps, and has a windowing system UI that’s similar to iPadOS. It feels like a “spatial” fork of iPadOS. iPad apps respond to “touch” if you bring them in arms reach you can do all the typical iPad gestures like scrolling, tapping, etc with your hand physically touching the app window, in addition to doing it with gaze.
- wpm 2y ago
  It’s just as locked down as the iPad, but more frustrating since there is so much clear potential that won’t be realized until Apple gets the fuck out of the way. They never will, since they claim ownership over both the platform and every single experience on it. Developers work for them, get paid by them, and do what they are told they are allowed to do. And it’ll choke this headset to death. They can’t pull the same crap with this platform but they’re going to try.
  - jitl 2y ago
    I agree that being much more iPad than Mac makes it feel like a huge waste of potential. Maybe it can’t be Mac-like in UI since you need large interaction targets, but it could allow much more “full computer” style productivity
- vineyardmike 2y ago
  I bought and returned the AVP. I feel like there's a cohort of people who always mention wanting "opened up" operating systems, and I get it, but this is totally not the problem with the AVP. iPads are popular too, after all. The AVP is an iPad, not a computer. It does offer a better "personal computing" story compared to a tablet, but that's it. There are many issues, but the cost and general UX is the issue. There's not a lot to do, and it's worse at most tasks than the alternatives.
LASR 2y ago
This is not going mainstream until we have the killer apps for it. Apple should really build a virtual workplace product and package that with the VP. WFHers like myself would jump on it.
- brailsafe 2y ago
  > This is not going mainstream until we have the killer apps for it. Do apps really seem like a compelling enough thing these days? Really? > Apple should really build a virtual workplace product and package that with the VP. WFHers like myself would jump on it. Same question, really!? Like... what would you jump on? Why? What do you do that some hypothetical "killer app" would improve, and so much so that it would be pivotal in helping this thing go mainstream?
  - throwaway11460 2y ago
    I work in a global team with people across every continent. It would be really great if we could all be in a room with few whiteboards and computer displays we can all look at when we feel like so just like we would in an office. Chat and video calls are very different from that seamless office experience of walking over to a whiteboard with a smaller subgroup, returning to the computer of one of us to try it out, inviting someone else from the larger group to check it out while pointing at the screen and the whiteboard etc. Not every day, not all day - but few hours for a hacking/bug fixing session would be super great.
    - asadotzler 2y ago
      And for that experience, you'd impose on everyone else the wearing of a 650 gram strap-on face computer? I don't want you as a co-worker.
      - throwaway11460 2y ago
        What do you mean by impose? All of us would like it. It was the first thing we talked about when Apple announced the headset.
kromem 2y ago
I think people here are underappreciating just how much generative AI is going to solve the chicken and the egg problem for VR that's been plaguing it. Within the next five years, at least tens of millions of people will have interactions they would rate as very important to them with AI personas. Personas they can't interact with in the real world. But strap on a headset and you can talk and see your AI buddy/therapist/girlfriend right there in the room with you? People are going to be throwing money at the hardware. It's always ultimately been a software issue. Yes, the hardware could get much better in comfort, fidelity, and all sorts of ways. But the thing that's been holding it back is that the software for VR is broadly a solution looking for a problem. Well, we're about to see a problem for which it's the perfect solution, and that's enhancing interpersonal interactions that are going to take up more and more media share as the next few years progress which can't be replicated nearly as well in any other format.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- kennyadam 2y ago
  I'm not sure why you're being downvoted. If you look at how many people cried out when they removed the sexual content from the Replika chatbot app (which wasn't even an LLM afaik, but I never used it) the number of people who will spend all day with their, ugh, waifu in VR once they can hold realtime, realistic conversations with them will be both immense and kinda depressing.

29 points by williamstein 2y ago

godzillabrennus 2y ago

There must be dozens of people who care if they keep releasing new versions by now.

blitzar 2y ago
They are all tech journalists or influencers looking for their next viral hit.

gary_0 2y ago

The technology to make a broadly appealing product is a lot further away than 2 years. With the Vision Pro, they made the VR equivalent of the Apple Newton. The "iPhone moment" is a long way away (assuming VR will ever even have mainstream appeal, which is definitely not guaranteed). The current tech available is just too clunky, slow, power-hungry, and expensive. And it just plain needs to look cooler than a weird pair of ski goggles.

rowanG077 2y ago
How doesn't vr have mainstream appeal right now? There are a ton of headsets available. It was 23 billion dollar market in 2023.
- cpldcpu 2y ago
  >It was 23 billion dollar market in 2023. How is that possible? Assuming an ASP of $333 USD (which is too high), this would be >70mio sold headsets?
  - rowanG077 2y ago
    That's possible because it's a mainstream market.
    - cedilla 2y ago
      If the $23 billion number is correct it's about 8-12% of the gaming market. Less market share (and less revenue) than 3D TVs had in its heyday (about 12 years ago). Yet you can't even get a new 3D TV today. So just having a big number doesn't mean anything for the future. Statista has about 11 million sold VR headsets sold last year. That's not mainstream, that's a niche.
      - rowanG077 2y ago
        MacBooks sold 21.9 million last year. I doubt I see anyone calling that niche.
        justinator 2y ago
        But MacBooks have sold in the millions/year now for essentially 33 years,
        dijit 2y ago
        I dont want to argue semantics, but a broad statement like this implies that all units sold are still in service. These things follow a curve, for laptops theres steep drop offs at 3, 5 and 8 years. 98% of 3 year old devices 60% of 5 year old devices 5% of 8y old devices. So you’d need to apply a sliding scale. Macbooks feel pretty ubiquitous, you cant use the entire 33y run of Macbooks to imply that the demographic is an order of magnitude more than what the parent implied.
        justinator 2y ago
        Not semantics, but if you think of examples of at least pop culture that we think of as being in the mainstream, it's about staying power of the genre. For example let's take Rock 'n Roll. When it really became popular -- say Elvis gyrating those hips -- he alone sold 10 million records in a year. And critics then talked of it as a fad that would die out. Elvis would continue to record, continue to sell millions, but eventually - well he died, but rock 'n roll the idea, the genre lived on. In fact rock 'n roll songs were written about how it will always rock 'n roll in defience of the "fad" label. And ~fifty/sixty years later, there are still rock 'n roll bands selling millions/records/year. Not Elvis but the genre remains. We can't quite compare records sales now anymore because physical media just isn't sold really anymore. That "staying power" isn't something VR headsets have (yet). Laptops have that. Critics say that VR is a fad and I think that's more what they mean. They say more critical things as well, but that's sort of the gist. Another example is the automobile: “[Motor cars] have the appearance of a fad, and an extremely dirty, dusty, inconvenient fad… These crude impracticable machines are unlikely for many years to displace in the Englishman’s affection a fine trotting horse and a smart trap.” -- Anonymous Horserider It's too soon to tell with VR headsets, but their limited capability, high price, and well: relative usefulessness seems not in their favor.
  - iwontberude 2y ago
    If you look at Meta's sales numbers it looks like they've sold 20 million headsets alone as of a couple months ago, so maybe its close but not quite? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39374031 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39374031
    - cpldcpu 2y ago
      https://www.statista.com/statistics/677096/vr-headsets-worldwide/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/677096/vr-headsets-world... This seems to be inconsistent with these numbers
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- rickdeckard 2y ago
  If that's true the markets outside of US would have to account for more than 30x of US sales, which I wouldn't expect to happen until every 2nd Chinese household has one... "Sales of VR headsets and augmented reality glasses in the U.S. plummeted nearly 40% to $664 million in 2023, as of Nov. 25, according to data shared with CNBC by research firm Circana." [1] [1] https://www.cnbc.com/2023/12/19/vr-market-shrinking-as-meta-pours-billions-of-dollars-into-metaverse.html https://www.cnbc.com/2023/12/19/vr-market-shrinking-as-meta-...
jillesvangurp 2y ago
I think it's not a hardware problem but a content problem. People are shooting for perfect with the hardware and meanwhile nobody is really bothering with the content much. It's all limited to games, 3D movies, and some gimmicky things that are a combination of awkward and not that exciting. Apple has some interesting conceptual stuff but in the end you end up using a lot of 2D stuff that gets projected in front of you. It's nice but not really that valuable. The problem with the vision pro isn't that it's not good enough but that good enough content to justify the expense is lacking. It would be more popular if it were cheaper. But even the Meta Quest, which is a lot cheaper, has the same problem so far.
- zarzavat 2y ago
  The content will come once the hardware is cheap and sold in volume. Generative AI will help by making it much cheaper to generate 3D content. Current models are still very rough, in the future we will have text-to-HD 3D asset.
  - jillesvangurp 2y ago
    Why would you buy the hardware though? The Meta Quest is cheap already (cheaper than a high end smartphone). And some people buy it of course but it's not really creating a new market of content generation so far. It's too much of a niche market for that.
- quartesixte 2y ago
  And with growing rumblings of people wanting to be “offline” more and more, promotions of “digital well-being/health”, and GenZ and GenAlphas’ increasing appetite with tactile, physical objects (with 90s/early 00s flair), I don’t see how “stick a screen to your face even closer and live completely digitally” is going to do well. Not until there is an absolute killer app/use case for VR Software. Games that allow for player movement based on thought-input? Social hangouts that are seamless but also private (the groupchat cannot be spoken aloud!)? We need better hardware too. Seamless AR/VR transition with featherweight hardware that does not induce motion sickness if put on or calibrated incorrectly all for $999. Yeah we got a LONG way to go. A bit of a tangent but as much as “the children” are terminally online, I get the feeling the GenX/Millennial product people have a slight misread on what that looks like.
detourdog 2y ago
It’s a chicken and egg problem. The Mac 128 was considered useless by experts and useful for people who only knew typewriters. I think the vision pro exists simple to introduce the user interface. I don’t expect to cret anything with mass appeal with the vision pro. I want to experience the environment to experience it and see how the experience can be leveraged. The physical form factor is a big hurdle. They may as well improve it by 10x before version 2.

ein0p 2y ago

All they really need to do for me to purchase one is add multiple user support. I’m sorry, I’m just not going to buy such an expensive device for each person in my family no matter how awesome it is. For Apple this is a trivial fix.

dwaite 2y ago
Even ignoring the software side, the current hardware leverages several sized components to get proper fit / focal length. I don't think it is really marketable as multi-user unless you can have it adjust to a face/head without juggling parts.
- ein0p 2y ago
  I’m ok with swapping magnetically attached parts.
- philshem 2y ago
  iPadOS isn’t multi-user either, and that is pure software.
  - ein0p 2y ago
    It’s less than one third the cost though.
  - wpm 2y ago
    iPad absolutely is multiuser. There are schools all over the world using Shared iPad. The OS is and always has been multi user, just like the OS it was based on was and still is.
    - gardenhedge 2y ago
      My iPad only allows one user..
      - wpm 2y ago

surfingdino 2y ago

Next try in 35 years? The future of VR is as bright, as it has always been and always will be. For perspective, read https://www.nytimes.com/1989/04/10/business/for-artificial-reality-wear-a-computer.html https://www.nytimes.com/1989/04/10/business/for-artificial-r... A lot of problems have been solved since 1989, but I see its future in military applications. The rest of the world does not have the problems that VR helmets solve.

bluescrn 2y ago
The problem they may solve is ‘the real world is increasingly bleak’. When living in ever-smaller homes with minimal personal space and accelerating urban decay outside, with decreasing access to transport to escape the cities, escaping to virtual spaces is likely to become more desirable.
- justinator 2y ago
  But VR headsets are as much as an escape as drugs are and that's not an exit, but more like a trap. As in: you are not entrapped within it, without actually improving anything in your life.
- wpm 2y ago
  Why would I need to “escape” my city?
- asadotzler 2y ago
  Living space isn't shrinking fast enough to save the Apple Vision Pro. We're talking 10% shrink over 20 or 30 years. That's just not gonna be the tipping point for enough people to drop their glorious 86" QNED/QLED TVs and their 32" 4k @ 240Hz QD-OLED gaming monitors, which can be had for less than the price of an AVP, certainly not in time to save it.

justinator 2y ago

It's probably going to be cancelled, re-imagined, relaunched - this thing is a dud. But that's not end of '26. That's going to be whenever Cook steps down, which honestly could be in the next few years.

CaptainFever 2y ago

I feel like I wouldn't want the Apple Vision Pro until they open up the OS; it is way too restricted right now, like iPad OS. Is this a reasonable concern?

SushiHippie 2y ago
Is there a difference between iOS and iPadOS in regards of restrictions, or why do you mention iPadOS specifically?
- jitl 2y ago
  Vision Pro runs iPad apps, and has a windowing system UI that’s similar to iPadOS. It feels like a “spatial” fork of iPadOS. iPad apps respond to “touch” if you bring them in arms reach you can do all the typical iPad gestures like scrolling, tapping, etc with your hand physically touching the app window, in addition to doing it with gaze.
wpm 2y ago
It’s just as locked down as the iPad, but more frustrating since there is so much clear potential that won’t be realized until Apple gets the fuck out of the way. They never will, since they claim ownership over both the platform and every single experience on it. Developers work for them, get paid by them, and do what they are told they are allowed to do. And it’ll choke this headset to death. They can’t pull the same crap with this platform but they’re going to try.
- jitl 2y ago
  I agree that being much more iPad than Mac makes it feel like a huge waste of potential. Maybe it can’t be Mac-like in UI since you need large interaction targets, but it could allow much more “full computer” style productivity
vineyardmike 2y ago
I bought and returned the AVP. I feel like there's a cohort of people who always mention wanting "opened up" operating systems, and I get it, but this is totally not the problem with the AVP. iPads are popular too, after all. The AVP is an iPad, not a computer. It does offer a better "personal computing" story compared to a tablet, but that's it. There are many issues, but the cost and general UX is the issue. There's not a lot to do, and it's worse at most tasks than the alternatives.

LASR 2y ago

This is not going mainstream until we have the killer apps for it. Apple should really build a virtual workplace product and package that with the VP. WFHers like myself would jump on it.

brailsafe 2y ago
> This is not going mainstream until we have the killer apps for it. Do apps really seem like a compelling enough thing these days? Really? > Apple should really build a virtual workplace product and package that with the VP. WFHers like myself would jump on it. Same question, really!? Like... what would you jump on? Why? What do you do that some hypothetical "killer app" would improve, and so much so that it would be pivotal in helping this thing go mainstream?
- throwaway11460 2y ago
  I work in a global team with people across every continent. It would be really great if we could all be in a room with few whiteboards and computer displays we can all look at when we feel like so just like we would in an office. Chat and video calls are very different from that seamless office experience of walking over to a whiteboard with a smaller subgroup, returning to the computer of one of us to try it out, inviting someone else from the larger group to check it out while pointing at the screen and the whiteboard etc. Not every day, not all day - but few hours for a hacking/bug fixing session would be super great.
  - asadotzler 2y ago
    And for that experience, you'd impose on everyone else the wearing of a 650 gram strap-on face computer? I don't want you as a co-worker.
    - throwaway11460 2y ago
      What do you mean by impose? All of us would like it. It was the first thing we talked about when Apple announced the headset.

kromem 2y ago

I think people here are underappreciating just how much generative AI is going to solve the chicken and the egg problem for VR that's been plaguing it. Within the next five years, at least tens of millions of people will have interactions they would rate as very important to them with AI personas. Personas they can't interact with in the real world. But strap on a headset and you can talk and see your AI buddy/therapist/girlfriend right there in the room with you? People are going to be throwing money at the hardware. It's always ultimately been a software issue. Yes, the hardware could get much better in comfort, fidelity, and all sorts of ways. But the thing that's been holding it back is that the software for VR is broadly a solution looking for a problem. Well, we're about to see a problem for which it's the perfect solution, and that's enhancing interpersonal interactions that are going to take up more and more media share as the next few years progress which can't be replicated nearly as well in any other format.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
kennyadam 2y ago
I'm not sure why you're being downvoted. If you look at how many people cried out when they removed the sexual content from the Replika chatbot app (which wasn't even an LLM afaik, but I never used it) the number of people who will spend all day with their, ugh, waifu in VR once they can hold realtime, realistic conversations with them will be both immense and kinda depressing.