Comments by "Technolus" (@technolus5742) on "Moon" channel.

Yeah just feeding on people's fears, which in turn gives them plenty of views.
109
Of course, paint a bleak picture and then promote investments to weather out the bleak future
5
What we need is to push government to make it illegal to use that data. Throwing away something useful and labeling those who use it idiots is pretty stupid itself.
4
That's how you imagine it to be. In practice I have testified to the opposite, with people who were alone finding special interactions they were lacking, being able to work through their fears and disabilities, with positive impact in their irl interactions.
4
@greensabr200 yes I know, just saying that cheap devices already exist. The form factor might be the main constraint for now, plus the lack of AR seamless integration into day to day activities. When it becomes as seamless to use as a phone, there will be little reason to not ditch the phone and use exclusively an xr device
4
WHATT?? PASSWORDS ARE ENCRYPTED BY DEFAULT. WHAT YOU ON ABOUT??? Don't deceive people.
3
That's apple's innovation! Other headsets require you to wave your hands around - this one only requires you to slightly move 2 fingers.
2
Exactly, this solves at least one obvious problem: the need for many screens (tv, pc, phone, watch, tablet, ...).
2
@VisitorOf22 It's got nothing to do with any of that. It's a matter of misaligned incentives and lack of control mechanisms, which allow creators to nefariously exploit features of the human psyche to game the algorithm.
2
It also rewards rewards youtuber to up the fear mongering, cause that stuff sells
2
They seem to be moving away from that, into ads that blend in more seamlessly into the landscape you are in. Of course it will be up to individual apps how well or how poorly they do it.
2
If you've ever watched TV you should know there's something called science fiction, which contains fictional elements that have never passed and will never come to pass.
2
Way too expensive? This stuff exists in the $200 range.
2
That is absolutely false. Participation in a digital society actually brought power to the people.
1
@mr.magoo2238 LOL you must be joking when there's quest 1's from 5 years ago at 60 dollars. Might as well start saying now that "it was always going to be the future" 🤦‍♂️ Amd let's not pretend a couple hundred dollars is a lot cause kids get gaming devices more expensive than that all the time.
1
@TheFroneyZone if you meet with someone using one of those you will be using one too and meeting virtually. These devices are not really meant to be taken anywhere. Devices that are, such as augmented reality raybans, tend to blend in much more. Even contact lends are being fitted with displays so there is a clear minification process going on. Regardless, its like people talking hands free looked nuts (and maybe they still do), but nobody bats an eye anymore.
1
@mr.magoo2238 yeah, a lot of stuff gets autoremoved. Only thing that annoys me is that Google is not upfront about the action they take and the specific reason for that action.
1
That final remark 🤣
1
Just cause you moma said so, doesn't mean it was ever true 😂
1
@-someone-. How wise of you to bring fake things to the discussion. Do I really have to explain how two words together may have their meanings altered (even radically so) from when they are apart? Or that the notion of bringing into fictional worlds elements of history or elements of science or scientific discoveries in a way that expands, bends or otherwise distorts them? Should certainly not be difficult to understand that objects and situations in startrek are supposed to have come about through scientific developments in that fictional world. Maybe it would be kind of not such a great idea to label scifi and historical dramas simply under fake, just in case people who are fans of a specific genre ever want to search a database.
1
MOON, you are deceiving people about online security. Only URLs are visible to wifi/isp/government. All the rest is encrypted by default. Passwords and non-url data are not visible to anyone but you and the host.
1
@johnarnold7984 That's a valid concern, consider contacting your representative and telling them how you want/don't want your data to be used.
1
They don't. It's mostly meta's platform that people dislike.
1
MOON, WHY ARE YOU LYING ABOUT INTERNET PRIVACY? Passwords and images are not visible to wifi/isp/government. All of that is encrypted by default. All they can see is basically origin and destination ip. That's all. So why lie about the product you're promoting?
1
You wouldn't want to be a part of anything in a horror story, and yet mummies are harmless. If you are put in the middle of the woods with nothing but your own body, you might be in for a rough time too. You are just not used to that. Plus you surelly will miss positive things that you have now. Look at things with realism. Change can be scary and confusing, and to you these "novelties" might always feel like a smartphone feels to an old grandpa. Your brain might just not be capable of adapting to new things anymore. But to new generations this will be as much a part of their life as all our devices are part of ours. Instead of being disoriented by fear, try to combat actual negative aspects and benefit from the positive ones.
1
Moon, you're literally lying in your VPN ad. Most non-vpn communication is encrypted. People can't obtain your photos nor password data off of a coffee shop wifi because that is encrypted. And neither can the government or internet providers. They can pretty much only see urls. Be honest my guy.
1
In many settings it's fine to use your phone and have your airpods out. Others it's not. It's not that big of a deal.
1
Not really, people simply don't realize they are using metaverses. For instance Roblox, a popular platform, demographics is a metaverse, but people don't realize that. Same for for minecraft and various others... It's just common to think metaverse is simply that 1 app from meta, and equating that with failure. But that's just 1 app.
1
They actually are solving a problem: screens having to be everywhere. We have a screen on a tv, a screen on the phone, another on the pc/laptop, tablet, watch, ... These can all be replaced by a single screen that is everywhere you need it to be, and has capabilities that go beyond other screens. This technology has the ability and potential to actually make interactions easier and more personal than while you're focused on your phone. This is just fearmongering, it's happened before, will happen again, and people will still use technology more and more without most of the fears coming to pass. It's the same exact thing as we already have but on a new platform that's all. Edit: bwt claims about shrinking attention spans are hyped by the media, but researchers don't actually agree on it, saying that it's largely task dependent.
1
@hardwired2 outside of it. The me too movement was an example of it, but far from the only example.
1
@jhgvvetyjj6589 lmao
1
Theres a lot of bs in this video. Eyes are the windows to the soul and this is meant to full them even by design? That you cant fall in love like this? What? That flies in the face of what is already a reality. So do claims of absolute intrusiveness as if disabling, muting and silencing notifications wasnt a thing, as if focus modes werent a thing. New technology is andl always has been a double edged sword. It is unreasonable to do away with the positives. The way foward is to mitigate the negatives. Are you concerned with the way data is and will be used? Contact your representatives and urge them to pass legislation to limit when and how this data can be used and to expand user control.
1