[massysett]

"I hope you’ll agree that humanity has a variety of important engineering problems to solve, and nicer-looking graphics is quite low on that list."

I used to sneer at the social value of entertainment. Then covid lockdowns hit. I spent a lot of time playing Factorio. When professional sports resumed playing (in empty stadiums, with fake crowd noise on the broadcasts) I was happy to sit on the couch after work and watch baseball.

Without that entertainment, there is no way I would have been able to trudge to my computer and work from home day after day, when the only thing I could leave my house for was an occasional walk and a frightful trip to the grocery store.

So even if the brain surgeon is not using those "nicer-looking graphics" to improve brain surgery (which could very well happen), the brain surgeon might just be looking at "nicer-looking graphics" to unwind after a day of brain surgery, which gets her ready for another day of brain surgery. Entertainment has value.

[wharvle]

Entertainment has gotten really weird now that we have (multiple forms of) recording, plus quick on-demand transmission to practically anywhere.

Basically all "need" I have of new recorded (to include video games—on-demand and not requiring the attention or effort of anyone but myself) entertainment is social. Any "need" for new entertainment exists because new entertainment is being created. If new entertainment stopped being created entirely, my quality of life wouldn't actually drop at all, because there's an astounding quantity & variety of it already, far more than I can engage with in a lifetime even restricting myself to the likely-to-be-very-good stuff. My friend-group, and entertainment media, could do exactly what we do with new entertainment, but instead by digging into older material we've so-far overlooked, instead of new.

[dwaltrip]

> If new entertainment stopped being created entirely, my quality of life wouldn't actually drop at all, because there's an astounding quantity & variety of it already, far more than I can engage with in a lifetime…

You don’t think there will be better entertainment in a decade or two? That’s what it sounds like you are saying.

[em-bee]

not that it won't get better. but that getting better entertainment is not a need.

for me on the other hand i can definitely see some improvements that i would like to see in entertainment. mostly in the generation of content for games, and graphics quality that is affordable for everyone. (i am not buying the latest graphics hardware, but i play games a few years behind the most modern available, but i expect that to improve as well)

i am happy for things to get better, but i have no desire to spend more money just to have it earlier.

[filiph]

Nobody disputes that entertainment has value. The article is about the fact that so much talent and resources is funneled into immersion.

Using your neurosurgeon example, I posit that having fewer VR headsets will not prevent the doctor from unwinding. Nor will having mobile phones with less vibrant colors or application with lower engagement metrics.

[pj_mukh]

There is a tragic flaw in your logic. There’s probably 10x engineers working on advertising then there is gaming (let alone VR). It’s not that big of an industry and doesn’t have the mass adoption attention destroying ad-driven social media does.

Statistically, the neurosurgeon is unwinding on TikTok and hating themselves for it.

Could VR become immersive and an ad-addled attention destroying mess? Yes we should probably stop that from happening. But otherwise this warning is too early.

[haswell]

> But otherwise this warning is too early.

When would the right time have been to warn people about the current generation of social media?

We now have a ton of information about how technology will be used and abused, and we have a laundry list of known problems that we have not solved. Algorithmic social media and engagement-driven content are front and center.

To me, the warning is appropriate not based on what hasn't happened yet, but based on what already has.

[pj_mukh]

The warnings started appropriately early in 2011, there should’ve been regulations in place by 2015.

VR is still in 2006.

Maybe let the first ad run in VR before you ascribe all the same problems to it.

[haswell]

What is it about VR that makes it meaningfully different enough from the current generation of problematic technology that we don't need to worry about the same problems?

This isn't a "gotcha" question; I'm genuinely curious. To me, VR is a new interface layer on top of a massive ecosystem, and the same people are building it. The ecosystem is where the problems exist, and VR is just the latest facade through which we interface with that ecosystem.

In this framing, it's not ascribing old problems to new technology as much as claiming that the new technology magnifies or intrinsically replicates the existing problems.

> The warnings started appropriately early in 2011, there should’ve been regulations in place by 2015

It's 2024 and the regulatory landscape is very poor or nearly nonexistent. Shouldn't this encourage more caution? i.e. we've already proven that looking back and deciding "oh yeah we should have been more careful" hasn't actually resolved the issue, and taking the same approach with emerging tech that has similar pitfalls seems doomed to repeat that.

I also don't think we had any idea what was coming when we were building the stacks that underlie the current web. We now have much clearer mental models of what the Internet and technology in general is capable of, and the resulting warnings are coming much earlier (appropriately, IMO).

[pj_mukh]

Sure let’s legislate social media. If the claim is the problems with VR will be the same problems as social media. Let’s legislate social media and that should solve problems in VR as well? As far as it’s just a new facade over social media and the noisy new internet, let’s legislate that.

I personally think the larger space of spatial computing (VR, AR etc) presents immense opportunities outside of its ability to just be another vehicle for ads. Leave that part alone because our regime of regulations only creates calcification and monopolization.

[HWR_14]

I don't know. Meta has not had a history that encourages me to just see what happens in a space they are popularizing. I would like it if we could get ahead of it.

[CatWChainsaw]

Why is it that techbros insist on no regulation until there's a problem, and when there's a problem it's suddenly "the confetti has left the cannon, nothing to do now"? Oh wait that was a rhetorical question.

[chimney]

Ironically enough, VR training for surgeons is actually booming in the medical space.

[pomian]

Ahhh, but perhaps a good working VR system may finally be enough for said surgeon to use it for a complex operation. There are byproducts likely unknown to us, with each advance on technology. (Good or ill.)

[EasyMark]

They are refining over time the ability to hit our pleasure (and fear) centers. Whole branches of advertising psychology are dedicated to it. If "will power" was an unlimited resource everyone could just turn on whenever they desired, then that wouldn't be an issue and I suspect America would be a lot thinner as well. It's a limited resource, and some people have a lot more of it than others. Therefore, some of these new technologies really do need to be regulated, knowing that while we are mental and spiritual beings, we are also biological beings who sometimes don't have the will power to overcome, especially a scientifically verified means of getting around our usual common sense to moderate and balance "things" in our lives.

[LiquidSky]

>Using your neurosurgeon example, I posit that having fewer VR headsets will not prevent the doctor from unwinding.

Sure, they can always fall back on the classic method for doctors to unwind: whisky.

[paulddraper]

How things look is important.

Not as important as how they function, but still important.

People, software programs, buildings, landscapes... appearance is information, about quality, about professionalism, about creativity, about attention to detail.

[szundi]

Civilization 1 and 2 was much greater experience than 5, although graphics was quite basic.

This is in some other aspects means the opposite

[paulddraper]

But at time of release, Civ 1 and 2 had best-in-class graphics.

[nevertoolate]

They’ve reached tabletop game quality and peaked there. Proves the point that we don’t need more immersive games than real life tabletop games, as our creative brain fills in the gaps.

[badpun]

> Civilization 1 and 2 was much greater experience than 5

How so? I've played all 3 of those, and much prefer the Civ 5. Or at least I think I do? I haven't played Civ 1 or 2 for 20 years now, so it's hard to compare.

[antifa]

The best civ game would be a remix of the best parts of 4 and 5.

[Nevermark]

> How things look is important.

Could someone tell UI designers?

It is deeply troubling how much effort goes into manipulating people, or just pleasing managers who’s checkbox includes “flat design, because?”, and how little effort goes into actually making interfaces visually effortless to understand, features easy to discover, and with flexibility to be really usable from a user’s perspective.

Our bicycles for the mind have become conveyer belts for e-mall shopping.

[trealira]

I think it'll be hard to ever move away from flat design, because everyone else does it, and it's associated with modernity, while skeuomorphism is associated with old software.

I don't have hard numbers, but I think flat design really became a lot more popular after Windows 8 was released. For a while, Windows 8 was heavily criticized for its UI design (and not just because it was flat), but they stuck with flat design the entire time, and I believe they had a great role in popularizing it.

I guess we'll just need someone else to make their UIs more realistic and 3D, like the old ones used to be, and stick with it no matter what others say, and the style may become popular again if their UI is in wide use.

[madsbuch]

While I think most people understand this sentiment, the root issue here was the lock-down – Yes, if you imprison a whole nation it is good to have some sedation. You could say that a lot of people wouldn't have gone through lock-downs without alcohol and porn either. That does not make it more admirable.

I agree in the sentiment that we have more important issues than providing ever more entertainment – we had no issues spending our time 50 years ago; Without immersive technologies. Instead of translating the extra resources technology have given to more entertainment, we could have translated it into more free time.

I would happily have less consoles, VR, and games and instead have a nation-wide 30 hour workweek (I need my friends not to work either).

[nostrademons]

Is it? I remember Marc Andreessen's comment near the height of the VR craze of ~2016, about "reality deserts". Some segment of the American population lives in an urban area (or suburban area / village with people they actually like), and for them, the idea that people might want to play computer games online instead of hanging out with their friends in person is unfathomable. But not everybody is privileged enough to have that situation. By the numbers, not even a majority of people is privileged enough to have that situation. A lot of people live in suburban boxes, don't have friends, and don't particularly like the people around them. For them, a technology where they can go out to the Internet, find people that they actually do like, and engage in activities that they all find fun is a godsend.

[madsbuch]

People should unionize, shouldn't they?

I merely expressed an opinion of an alternative society I would rather be a part of and based on your comment, I don't seem to be the only one.

But it requires us to, collectively, value our time higher.

in the end am I from Denmark. and here we certainly have another approach to work life balance.

[ozr]

Even beyond entertainment, interacting with things that are aesthetically pleasing is fundamentally good for individuals and society.

[ComposedPattern]

Games certainly have social value, but I'm not convinced that better graphics contribute all that much. I've not played Factorio, but looking at screenshots it seems not to have particularly advanced graphics. Indeed, I still get a lot of enjoyment out of 20-year-old games and often wish that modern games had less sophisticated graphics so they would run better.

[trealira]

To some extent, graphics are important because with extremely primitive graphics, like the graphics of the NES, it can get difficult to tell what things are represented by the image, and the limited color palette presents a challenge in making the game look aesthetically pleasing.

A game doesn't need the most advanced graphics to look aesthetically pleasing, though. It can be made up for by using an art style that doesn't need powerful hardware, e.g. modern pixel art, or the simplistic, cartoonish look that 3D Nintendo games use. Mirror's Edge still looks great due to its art direction and use of techniques like precomputed lighting.

However, different people have different standards. I've been really enjoying playing the game Crypt of the Necrodancer, and I think the pixel art is also pretty good and aesthetically pleasing, but when I showed the game to my friend to see if he might like it, he rejected it because "the art didn't speak to him." Evidently, compared to me, he has a higher minimum for graphics in order for a game to be fun for him.

[Dalewyn]

More people need to appreciate that video games have been at the core of what drives computing technologies forward.

[edgyquant]

Using lockdowns as a reason why we need entertainment seems so strange. We should instead not be locked down and focus our attention on building tech to prevent that. Not arguing against entertainment mind you, just seems strange to me.

[bongodongobob]

You're missing the point. The lockdown made him realize that he was taking the importance of entertainment for granted.

[icapybara]

Engineering makes life easier, art makes life worth living.

[Nevermark]

True. When engineering and art are created in service and for the edification of others.

But they also create systems and media designed to extract as much value from humans as possible, by bypassing any mindfulness on their part. Regardless of any regretful impacts.

Not sure what I am saying, other than completing the picture as it is today.

[1vuio0pswjnm7]

The surgeon does not need images or Javascript or even CSS to listen or watch. She only needs the audio/video files. The problem with adding "graphics" that are purportedly to assist the surgeon in opening these files is that web developers have generally sold out to marketers and advertisers. As it happens, the best way to avoid the marketing and advertising is to bypass the "graphics".

[Dracophoenix]

Funny you mention Factorio, because there's a Reddit thread where most of the commenters came to same conclusion you did.

https://old.reddit.com/r/slatestarcodex/comments/ml00ac/how_...

[antifa]

I like the delusional presumption/implication that there are hundreds of thousands of long-term unfilled job listings for things like fusion researcher, nano bots engineering, space exploration, (other near future sounding stuff), etc., and the only reason those things aren't getting worked on is because every Factorio/EVE player is a genius with a debilitating video gaming addiction.

[atorodius]

This comment made me sad. I would hope we aim for jobs that don‘t invoke the feeling of „trudging“ and the need for „entertainment“.

[warkdarrior]

All jobs have a repetitive aspect, exactly because we want experts in those jobs to do the job. But for the experts the work may often be boring and repetitive.

I am pretty sure most of a surgeon's surgeries are NOT exhilarating experiences for them, but rather routine activities. Similarly for lawyers drafting contracts, software engineers developing web backends, construction workers building houses, or singers singing their repertoire.

Not all of these jobs can be automated, so some routine will always exist.

[trealira]

Not all work is fun. I don't really like washing the dishes or vacuuming the floor where I live, but it's necessary work. A lot of jobs are the same way. Even when a job consists of a fun activity, doing it 8 hours a day, 5 days a week might again invoke the feeling of trudging. I've heard art jobs are like this, and programming jobs. I don't think this is something we'll ever really solve.

[JohnFen]

> Entertainment has value.

It absolutely does! But I would argue that "nicer looking graphics" is not required for something to be entertaining.

[jyunwai]

I appreciate the comment, especially with the example with the hypothetical brain surgeon. I've also anecdotally known people personally who have become accomplished in academic research, who preferred easy-to-access entertainment to decompress after a difficult day of work. So, work on entertainment does have important value to many people.

But at the same time, on a broader point, the author has a compelling general idea that it can be helpful to question how you spend your time away from work. I've spoken with people—and have personally experienced—a satisfaction from physical hobbies outside of computer interaction. Rock climbing is especially popular among the people I know (even those with busy schedules), along with martial arts such as BJJ or judo. I also know a couple people (one personally, and another impersonally through his biography as a novelist named "What I Talk About When I Talk About Running") whose life enjoyment is closely tied to their passion for long-distance running.

Outside of physical activity, other low-technology ways of entertainment will remain important. Reading books, especially classical ones, can improve one's writing. I've also read about chess players who have attributed their strong ability to plan ahead—in life and martial arts—to their passion for the game. I've additionally known people whose interests in music performance and production led them to develop good friendships with others. Naturally, this can apply to immersive technology: video streaming or high-graphics video games also have the ability to inspire people in their day-to-day life, or help people make meaningful connections.

---

My source of skepticism is therefore not with the people working toward on nicer-looking graphics, as highlighted by the author, but rather with the people who apply psychology in video game design to make certain video games addictive—especially those with free-to-play models, which employ gameplay loops to keep people grinding for rewards even when the game stops feeling fun. I think the author is focusing on the wrong part of the industry: certain game designers have had a larger role with making certain video games have negative effects, as evidenced by somewhat-recent successful lawsuits against game companies that employed loot boxes and overly-easy ways to make in-game purchases in certain games targeted toward children.

Video games and streaming can absolutely have a healthy place in one's life—especially productions created for the love of the art instead of primarily for the money—but only in moderation and not at the excessive expense of other ways to spend one's free time. Graphics development isn't a problem at all, but I do think many people's lives can become richer if they also give passions that don't require a personal computing device a strong chance.

[aisuujudjdn]

With all due respect, I think you took the exact opposite lesson from the pandemic that you probably should have and that your story implies.

[brailsafe]

Why is that? Remember that during the pandemic, many places shut down any other sources of social stimulation that might be there, including actual socializing. Unless you had a very specific set of existing interests, it was hard to find anything outside of work to do in many cases.

[Solvency]

It's such a neckbeardy sentiment. I could also drive the "functional" car that Homer designed in The Simpsons, but my psyche wouldn't survive a week.