Cowen asks (https://medium.com/conversations-with-tyler/tyler-cowen-robert-wiblin-stubborn-attachments-80000-hours-podcast-359aa62aa8ab …) if VR can finally replace face-to-faces. People this weekend agreed there's something special about face-to-face but not about what, when I asked: is voice enough? Gesture tracking? Eye-gaze tracking? Facial mapping? How could this be tested?
-
-
Replying to @gwern
recall there was a big push for specialized corporate video web conference rooms at $30k a pop maybe 8 years ago. I think there's some associated studies on latency, video fidelity required, etc, before people said they were as good as live. tried some searches but ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ntaylor963
Yeah, hypothetically a 'glass wall' should be as good as in-person if it's all audio-visually mediated. Of course, VR headsets still have the advantage of being way cheaper/compact, and might have other advantages (better latency because sending more abstracted data?).
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @gwern
yes. I guess my point if is there are public studies from that "glass wall" attempt, it'd be good guess for where you need to get to reach true face to face. I tried one once. It was (at the time) quite shocking how useful it was for catching facial emotional nuance.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ntaylor963
Yeah, it would definitely be an upper bound on how much AV fidelity you need. My worry is that you can argue that the really useful rare connections at conferences like initiating friendships require higher fidelity and wouldn't be measured appropriately in available studies.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
(Studying corporate meetings is arguably studying a very coarse and simplistic and formalized form of human interaction, which can be satisfied within available measurements by crude methods.)
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.