[monkeynotes]

Let's wind this back to the days when people thought reading books was an indulgent waste of time.

The best artists are writing trivial drivel for women to read.

The best minds are finding new ways to sell books.

It's a stupid heuristical argument.

[filiph]

It looks like you're countering with the "it's always been the case" argument. I use it often myself, but I think it's good to realize when it's stretched too far.

Yes, I'm sure there were some people in the past who said that reading books is an indulgent waste of time. I'm sure you could find articles in old newspapers.

That in itself doesn't mean that working on a VR headset technology is as meaningful as working on a more sustainable energy source or developing software for cancer research, does it? Just because you find a similarity with something that happened in the past doesn't mean you can just abandon all critical thought.

[monkeynotes]

> I think it's good to realize when it's stretched too far.

Who is the arbiter of when it's stretched too far? I am working with the data we have to make an empirical expectation. Speculation is fine, but if we are going to make an effort to ground it in reality I feel like prior art is as the best bet we can make.

> Just because you find a similarity with something that happened in the past doesn't mean you can just abandon all critical thought.

I think I am actually applying critical thought. I am challenging a narrative that doesn't seem to have a precedent and looking at examples from the past that were similar unprecedented technological changes. This seems to be a reasonable approach to set reasonable expectations. Of course I could be wrong, but I feel like at least my pitch is based on some historic data.

FYI the book reading this wasn't just an aside in a newspaper, it was a cultural concern shared by many.

https://timeline.com/what-technology-are-we-addicted-to-this...

[yamazakiwi]

I'm not disagreeing, but I believe it is a better use of ones time to prioritize things that spark personal significance rather than attempting to quantify/compare meaningfulness universally.

I would never listen to someone who proposes reallocating high-level talent resources as an important and solvable problem where the solution is, tell those people their passions are a waste of time. I also don't believe this person understands the talent market as they quote the "Many of the most talented artists of our time work in advertising," nonsense. Yes their are smart people working in advertising, but it's no deeper than that. There are other spaces and industries that have more brilliant minds.

The truth is, you don't know with certainty if working on VR technology is more meaningful or not.