What is the "Optimal" Virtual Reality Experience/Future

" Markystal " wrote:
The true terror I can imagine is people hacking other people's simulations and causing true havoc on an experiential level. How does one quantify VR torture or rape on a legal and social scale? These are the nightmares that VR enthusiasts and pioneers will have to face if we want to bring out the mediums true potential.

Thanks for your thoughtful reply :D. I imagine that there are all sorts of issues to be explored with respect to VR and self-identity, and by extension, identity theft. Considering these issues now before one is able to easily use a life-like avatar within a VR environment will help people to prepare (at least that is my hope). SIM personification has a number of interesting psychological and technical dimensions. For example, on the tech side we need low error facial recognition algorithms for delivering real-time non-verbal information in VR (not an easy task!). Also, the ‘uncanny valley’ issue, something which may well be strong enough to perturb some people from using a personalised SIM (at least until they become realistic enough to be visually indistinguishable from life). On the psychological side, one would expect an owner to identify more with a very realistic SIM, although the threshold for this will likely vary from person-to-person. But, since some people get touchy now when another person deliberately uses the same online name and avatar in a web forum, one can imagine what will happen when that person has their SIM identity stolen (I’m assuming preventative security as rigorous as that used for on-line banking would be a necessary here). I’m no lawyer, but I also agree 100% that quantifying VR torture or rape would be complex. As these sickening real-life crimes often mean that a victim cannot escape the situation, this aspect is more complex in VR, particularly if a SIM has been hijacked. But, broadly speaking, I would expect VR to be covered by current laws regarding online interactions, although trolling is clearly a grey area. New legislation will of course be needed as the field matures and threats are identified. It also remains an open question as to the extent to which frequent use of a personalised SIM would induce depersonalisation effects, especially if the SIM becomes an ‘idealised’ version of the self rather than a faithful reproduction. I’m thinking that this could be particularly dangerous territory for someone with say, body dimorphic syndrome. I hope that any downside to VR will be surpassed by the mediums true potential for good. But, we will need safeguards to encourage people to engage with reality, not withdraw from it. Personally, I find mindfulness meditation to be of great help, but that’s just me. If done right, I’m hopeful that people will come to cherish reality more, as VR is likely to remain an imperfect experience for some time to come. Yes, I see potential for VR if one is unable to have a particular ‘real’ experience due to illness. See also https://developer.oculusvr.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=7980

Thanks for the link on the EEG paper, it looks interesting and I will read it :D . Here’s one you may like on Transcranial Pulsed Ultrasound: http://ac.els-cdn.com/S0896627310003764/1-s2.0-S0896627310003764-main.pdf?_tid=314dbdb6-cb3e-11e3-abc3-00000aab0f02&acdnat=1398295552_a43bf3bb786ee917a4230db19911bc10

" Markystal " wrote:
In terms of information, my own VR rig set up design intends to keep track of this data constantly during play and record it to update calibration systems for accurate play. A las, this is still mainly a hypothesis at this point and I'll want to do some personal testing on the matter later this year to get a better grasp of my thoughts on the matter. I'll probably share the results on this forum on the section for the input thread I put up or on the thread I made in regards to my VR rig for this year.

I look forward to hearing about that! :) I also agree that we will need a genius to appear in coming years as well as major breakthroughs in the understanding of the brain and in particular, how subjective experiences cascade through the brains neural-glial networks. On that, my personal view is that consciousness is probably what it feels like when information is processed in a particular (integrated) way. If interested see an excellent article on this at: http://www.architalbiol.org/aib/article/view/15056/23165867

" mrmonkeybat " wrote:
Full body tracking would be good but the lack of tactile feedback will sometimes limit imersion, if you dont invent forcefields or tractor beams for holodeck type interaction the only route to full tactile feedback would be a complete robotic exoskeleton, which would be expensive.

Great to hear your thoughts :) . I’m not holding my breath for forcefields or tractor beams though! But interesting work being is being done by Japanese scientists using sound waves to levitate objects, so who knows! Not familiar with how Pcells could read/stimulate individual nerve fibres. At the least I think one would need some sort of interface devise on the nerve to start with relaying impulse data. However, I’m thinking this tech may be useful for helping high density electrode arrays (used in some EEG studies) to be wireless, which would be a great help! Personally I’m also hoping that synthetic biology will one day enable novel proteins to be incorporated into biological tissues allowing them to interface more easily with non-invasive stimulation tech.