Ask HN: Isn't VR an indirect competitor for the self driving car?

3 points by cxhartmann 10 years ago | 4 comments

What's the benefit of streamlining the process of moving our carcasses when our senses can eventually travel for free at the speed of light? Yeah we need a distribution network to move inanimate objects, or for the occasional vacation, but for us consumers/workers don't we primarily drive today to connect our senses anyway. #firstworldcommuteproblems

shrineOfLies 10 years ago |

By asking this question, you're essentially making a huge assumption. Firstly, Do humans drive to work to only connect their senses? When you say we "primarily drive to connect our senses anyways", you're diluting the purpose of the entire exercise of "working" to "connecting our senses". Which is false.

Consider the profession of driving. There will always be a need for "drivers", not just humans, for transporting goods, services etc. Is driving an exercise of just connecting our senses? No. It also involves performing actions based on inputs from these senses. Why would anyone want to create VR based drivers? It makes no sense, because self driving cars are already possible. Self driving cars have already won the competition in this case. This is the one scenario where VR and self driving cars compete.

Now consider the profession of software development. Here, let's say VR made it such that you wouldn't have a need to drive to work. Then, you wouldn't drive to work, but you'd still need to get places - for which a car (maybe self driving) is still required. In this case, again, self driving cars and VR are not competing. One has made removed the need for the other for a very specific purpose. This is not competition.

I think your question is asked with a very narrow minded view of "working". You're probably a software engineer. AMIRITE?

insoluble 10 years ago | |

> but you'd still need to get places

Or places could come to you. Nearly all labour is likely to become replaced by robotics eventually. The human body could be seen as being there only to transport the mind; but when the mind gets its information and stimulation virtually, and when the mind's physical will is fulfilled by robots, there is no longer a need for the body to relocate.

hightechlowlife 10 years ago |

It's a very novel way to look at it, but I think you're right. Constructed reality by its very design replaces the use of actual reality. We've seen this trend with the internet and I can only imagine it will continue.

People are driving less, interacting less, working from home more, and using screens more. I'm fairly confident this isn't going to change when you make staying at home even more convenient and pleasurable. It should naturally accelerate.

Take a look at this graph:

http://blog.sgws.org/files/2012/04/MediaUseGraph.jpg

In fact, if you want to enter the rabbit hole of tech pessimism, read this report from 2010:

http://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.whywaldor...

It isn't pretty.

thomas-b 10 years ago |

It's definitely an interesting way to look at how VR and robotics could affect us depending on the direction we take with it. I'm sensing a whole lot of Wall-E in that.