> Once you rethink the vending machine interface, maybe a different modality reveals it self. You haven't said why one should. The screen is 2d, the LRUD inter

> Once you rethink the vending machine interface, maybe a different modality reveals it self. You haven't said why one should. The screen is 2d, the LRUD interface is 2d. It's simple and works well. What are we leaving on the table? The article says this "represents a monetization opportunity for Meta". What does it represent for me? Other than an opportunity to have new types of screens to buy. > “Instead of a $500 TV sitting in front of us, what’s to keep us from one day having it be a $1 app,” I'm already at my peak being online and attached to screens. If I make any change it's going to be in the direction of being less online, not more. I don't want smart glasses keeping me online at all times. I don't want TV glasses enabling me to watch TV at all times. My $500 TV serves its purpose perfectly already and I don't need to bring it with me. Even if I wanted a permanent TV in my glasses and the app was only $1. The app will track the shit out of me. My TV is kept off the network. Going from cable to streaming added the adtech industry's surveillance and unskippable ads. There's no way Meta won't shit out something worse than I can still cling to with my offline TV. Surely I lack the imagination to see how cool VR TV apps could be, but it doesn't take imagination to know how this is going to be consumer-hostile.