One of my heuristics for tech investing is to find the most boring, least “sexy”, and least toy-like application of a technology and put my and my clients’ money there. Bonus points for an application that contributes to a societal good, like the one @anon73430903 suggested. If making money under a capitalistic system is one’s bag (as it is for me), it’s a good way to go.
That’s not re-phrasing. It’s how people in this topic have been describing Lawnmower Man on the Subway.
Yeh they really should have thought to add an alert to others about recording / live-streaming.
But I’m not sure it was for lack of empathy: in some ways I suspect that the whole front persona thing was a horrible misfire / overshoot on what they thought would better socially / emotionally “connect” the user to the outside world when something much more basic and obvious was needed.
It seems to me, though, that if the profit motive is at the heart of development, it’s always gonna be the most sexy and least useful applications that are going to be foregrounded. Because there is far less money in our system for helping people live better lives (especially those who are small group within society that most often has less wealth and power to throw around) compared to selling the next “cool” gadget to the most amount of people. Any really helpful things that come out of VR are going to be secondary, at best.
The fact that they did not do that relatively simple thing speaks volumes.
yes, it was. The POINT is to give people a flashy gadget they can parade about, whatever the ramifications to the rest of the public. Lack of empathy doesn’t have to be a conscious choice to be true.
It’s definitely so from the short-term profit motive that drives everything these days. Investors initially make more from a bubble of hype than something sustainable…and by next quarter their money will probably be in something else anyway. It’s done an amazing job making sure the tech we need gets starved in favor of a succession of brief-lived gimmicks.
Neo-liberalism 101! It’s all about building the economy from the top-down, not from the bottom-up or middle-out…
And that doesn’t even get into how disposable this gadget will end up being… yet another piece of plastic-laden e-waste to ship to the poor countries, I’m guessing, the same countries where they extract the materials to make the tech… 
That’s the rephrase I meant. The latter is a bit distracting: it’s fun to talk about where tech is going and how we can improve it to help society / talk about the harms, uses, etc. Less fun to call strangers assholes for using said tech when we really have no idea what their values or intentions are.
Sometimes they ARE objectively being assholes, though. And it’s worth calling them out for it.
The former and the latter are often independent. They’re often still assholes regardless of values or intentions.
I’d argue that a lack of empathy and increasing disconnection from actual human interaction is a big part of the long term goal; it makes the masses ever easier to manipulate and control.
I’m getting flashbacks from 25, 30 years ago, so at least this is making me feel young again.
Yeah, you can tell from how even the proponents here are describing it as a step toward something. There may be new iPhones all the time but you don’t have to switch right away. Win or lose, though, I doubt this thing will be supported for long at all. 
For sure. That’s the arbitrage behind the money-making rule of thumb I described above. I focus on the lucrative and useful applications with long-term potential that are ignored and let the mugs pile into the sexy short-term stuff with no real business model.
Having worked in the tech industry in various capacities for 25+ years, my opinion is that it is a lack of empathy: specifically lack of empathy for anyone who isn’t an introverted middle-class-plus cis-het-presenting white (or model minority) male end-user to whom tech comes naturally.
I say that as an introverted, geeky, affluent cis-het white male myself. I know that tech and popular culture are basically designed for me. But I also know that the situation leaves out large numbers of people (and, in business terms) leaves a huge amount of money and unfulfilled potential on the table. That’s why another of my heuristics since the 1990s has been to hire women, PoC, LGBTQ people, and people from disadvantaged backgrounds to the enterprises I spin up. It’s paid off in so many ways, and not only financially.
Not to speak for @sqlrob, but assholish behavior isn’t just about intentions.
The road to hell is paved with good intentions. Not like there isn’t commonly held precedent.
Do all the same shit you do now, but with an expensive mask on!
VisionBrick™
This is a great use for VR. It has been shown to help things like various phobias and fears. Being able to “feel” what it’s like to be in a particular situation without actually being in danger is huge.
I think the thing that is being misunderstood is that good intentions do not imply lack of harm. Talking about the harms is constructive. Affixing intentions (like lack of empathy, stupidity, malice, etc) with relatively little evidence (using a device in public) is a strategy to build sentiment. Do we want to talk about how stupid the user is or what the user or makers could do differently. Personal preference is the latter as the former is petty and pointless to boot.
The point for that discussion is BEFORE release. And given the lack of “we’re recording”, not even considered.
If they stop using it in public because of shame before that feature is implemented, then it had a good purpose.
Yet, we’re expected to set that aside and empathize with the people who might be doing harm in the world?
Does intention matter when the outcome is the same… and yes, one can be lacking empathy for others in situations like this, and be rightfully criticized for it, even if their intentions were not to materially harm others.
It’s not one or the other. In fact, the two are connected. By talking about what people ARE doing with this, we can open up a discussion on possible harms and alternative uses that are actually helpful rather than harmful. But dismissing the entire conversation because YOU don’t feel we’re being empathetic enough to people with enough wealth to display it like this isn’t particularly helpful in having a productive conversation, frankly.
