Hacker News Reader

Comment by LorenDB | Hacker News Reader

Having experienced both 6DOF and 3DOF on my Quest 3, I can confidently say that 6DOF is leagues ahead even if you are sitting in a chair. Unless you are watching a 180° stereoscopic video, you'll want to look around to get the full experience, and even the small translation movements that result when you turn around can make the experience nauseating.

Besides, VR is already cheap. A new Quest 3S is just $300 and can do pretty much all of what the $3500 Vision Pro can do (just worse); if you just want VR games you can get used 6DOF-capable PCVR or PSVR headsets on eBay for closer to $100.

View on HN

> Quest3S … pretty much all of what the … VisionPro can do

It can’t do that “protecting your privacy” thing. And that’s a dealbreaker for many, many people.

>And that’s a dealbreaker for many, many people.

Yup. The sole reason I haven't bought any of these meta headsets.

They come with strings attached. Or more like, they're fetters and chains.

Which string exactly? I don't use Facebook.. What data are they going to sell?

>I don't use facebook

But you need an account to use a meta VR set.

Exactly this.

I'd like to go for something like the 3S but anything Meta is a hard no from me.

I deleted my Oculus account when they took over, and yet somehow I still get Oculus emails from Meta.

Quest is “protecting your privacy” the same amount as VisionPro does.

why i don't have either.

this line of argument don't help the discussion.

both companies report millions from selling your information, so assume they are always amassing loads of it, to sell when the price is convenient for them.

> both companies report millions from selling your information

Where can I buy it?

This might help start looking: https://www.forbes.com/sites/metabrown/2015/09/30/when-and-w...

Doesn’t help at all. I’m looking to buy data collected and sold by Meta and Apple.

I doubt they sell it to individuals. Data brokers is the easiest way. You could always write to them directly and ask.

You absolutely can't because neither company does it.

This is just a profit calculation though. Do they earn more by keeping and mining this information or by selling it, or both? For now they might not be selling it (I don't know), but that can change before you say "but GDPR...".

you're either too poor or not well connected.

the "accessible" way is to enter a real time "header" biding agreement. but chances are you don't know about it either and is just making noise.

Okay, well then let me ask you a question that should be easier to answer: where does Apple report that they make millions from selling user data?

> It can’t do that “protecting your privacy” thing

Besides 'it's Meta' ; what is it doing with my privacy? I mean actually proven things, not 'probably it is'.

(I am not saying it isn't, but I haven't heard anything in this regard, so it would be interesting to know)

As a dev I see Meta made many decisions to respect privacy that constrain the kind of app I make although I've heard these will be somewhat relaxed.

I'd like to place a picture with a QR code in it, have somebody scan the code, then have the option of jumping into a world.

Apps can't access the cameras so you can't write a QR scanner. The Quest has a decent web browser but you can't access the cameras and make a web based QR scanner.

Without access to the cameras apps cannot at all understand the environment and enable you to interact with it. AR apps now have a special module that identifies a physical volume inside your space on a session by session but that's a pale shadow of the SLAM tracking of the Microsoft Hololens and Apple Vision that let you stick a "hologram" into the corner of your office and have it stay there.

Quest 3 devs need more access to make more interesting apps.

Vision Pro doesn't let you access the cameras either, being able to stick an app in the corner of your office is handled by the OS. I'd rather not hand out camera access, the problem that needs fixing is the "session by session" part where Meta's OS doesn't maintain permanent app-volumes.

Isn't this more an issue with how the data from the camera is used? Or rather, where it can go? Maybe I'm a bit naive here, but isn't the issue that we don't want camera data going to third parties (or really... any party). So is there not a way that this can be sandboxed? Camera data must stay on device in an enclave. Honestly, this seems what's wanted for a lot of type of data. Is this just not possible to actually implement in the OS? Because I'd imagine not being able to process vision data really limits what you could do.

I think of this kinda like the data collection with many phone apps. I understand that it needs access to the networks to make connection to wifi or bluetooth, but why is this bundled together with an app's ability to record and send that data back to the developer? There has to be a better way to handle all this.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com