“If it’s inaccessible to the poor it’s neither radical nor revolutionary.”
Zach Leatherman 3939 replies 208208 likes135135 reposts Original on Mastodon39 replies
All things that are central to radical and revolutionary events were once available only to the rich. It's how they came to exist at all. Writing, Books, Candles, Bulbs, Radios... each and every one "radical" and "revolutionary". Culture changing tech. And always were, even before they did.
Revolutionary *things* exist before the revolution. The things are still radical and revolutionary - the revolution itself just hasn't happened yet due to the lack of general accessibility.
@mattwilcox just to baseline the original point here, I think the current event context that’s resonating here has most folks thinking about the Apple Vision goggles—do you still want to stand by your post in that context?
@zachleat I do. Much like Walkmans initially had a “unsociable, for the rich, why would anyone want that, how rude”… this will be the same. Mainstream in households in a decade. No one batting an eye about wearing them. Later, cheap enough for all. Then, spatial computing will have revolutionised society just like smart phones have.
@zachleat Especially as this tech gets around one of the biggest limits in modern society; poorer averages, with smaller houses. Making use of almost no space will become more and more important.
@mattwilcox hmm—you want to judge the merit of a $3500 device on future potential?
will you buy one?
@zachleat I judge the merit based on problems it solves and “this is fun” reaction. Just as I wouldn’t have bought the first Walkman, first iPhone, first laptop, or first computers - I won’t buy this. But in all cases it’s pretty obvious why those things would become revolutionary and ubiquitous. This is the same. It’s an early clunky expensive version. It’s todays portable Commodore. Give it time.
@zachleat Importantly; this is *already* viable. It concentrated on 2D workflows and existing compute interfaces. All it does extra is allow infinite screens in any room of any size. Any number of screens in a room the size of your closet. That alone is good. Add to that true 3D stuff; like photos and video; that it’s capable of. Why *wouldn’t* anyone want one, except cost? Virtualise all your *current* screens with one device? Sold. For the right price.
@mattwilcox if neither of us are buying one that’s proof enough that we needn’t discuss it further 😅
@zachleat Well, I don’t that means a thing about whether it’ll be revolutionary or not. But check back in a decade.
> Why *wouldn’t* anyone want one, except cost?
because there is no ethical way to do QA testing on a VR product.
"Especially when i was working in VR games as a QA tester, you would be in the headset anywhere from four to eight hours a day with essentially two small tv screens blaring into your eyes. It's worth noting that vr manufacturers actually suggest players only stick to like 30 to 60 minutes a day. I personally have long term eye vision damage from that experience."
@mattwilcox @zachleat on top of that, apple is encouraging people to use this both at work and at home.
Which means work will eventually depend on it.
So a lot of people are going to develop new visual disabilities.
@zachleat You see this a ton with disability dongles, or the kinds of hackathon-winning tech that's apparently designed to fix some aspect of disability but for which clearly few/no disabled people have been consulted (https://blog.castac.org/2022/04/disability-dongle/)
Even if the tech *could* be useful, it's invariably sold in hyper-limited quantities at prohibitively expensive prices, thus ensuring it'll never change the world as much as its creators claim.
@ben excellent point!
@zachleat The same was said about using computers in education. We should focus less on price and more on future potential. I await further evidence. (Are we talking about the Apple mixed reality headset?)
@mlmiller just to be clear, you’re talking about Apple’s Vision goggles? (I see your edit now)
The goggles are hardly a “computers in education” level event 😬
@zachleat I was. I was just saying we need to look past v1.0 of new technologies and ”invent a future” where costs come down and potential impact goes up for all. While the benefits have yet to be demonstrated, we should not dismiss the tech simply because the first one out the door is too expensive for mass adoption. So were computers in general, so was the Lisa, and so on. I am more worried to understand how such inventions may ultimately help us learn.
@mlmiller for sure! I think we can hold a $2.8 trillion dollar company to a bit higher standard than “it might get better in the future” though
@zachleat well that definitely holds up to more than 5 seconds of rational thought.
@jakecarpenter everything ok over there?
@zachleat nothing needs to be wrong to call out a horrendous take.
@jakecarpenter what’s wrong with the take?
@zachleat @jakecarpenter [tapping my foot and my watch]
@jakecarpenter @exchgr welcome back! I suspect we just have different worldviews, and that’s okay ❤️
@zachleat the first computers were something that only universities could afford.
products can be revolutionary while being expensive
meta quest being more affordable doesn't make it revolutionary by default
affordable and revolutionary aren't mutually exclusive
@dvngnt I think the intention behind the original quote is that things are not revolutionary until they are accessible
@zachleat i understand the spirit of the quote, but i feel in the context of apple vision i think they realize that the first gen pro model isn't meant to sell many units, but more to show what the experience could be.
in the future, newer revisions and competitors like meta will bring the price down
@dvngnt well I do hope they succeed but will hold applause until success arrives
@zachleat i don't use mac products because i don't like being locked into their ecosystem
but what i do like about apple is they do drive the industry forward and other companies will try to follow them.
Using a valve index for the past 2 years looking for a good pcvr upgrade. I imagine this will light a fire under the med-big tech companies
@zachleat Or aimed at developers.
this toot is a libertarian honeypot 🫠
@zachleat FWIW, this line’s from/by Jonathan Herrera Soto! https://jonathanherrerastudio.com/
@beep amazing! I tried to hunt this down a bit (unsuccessfully) so I really appreciate the source!
-
