105
Meta admits its first ‘superintelligence’ was too stupid to survive for three days
(www.theregister.com)
this post was submitted on 13 Jul 2026
105 points (97.3% liked)
Technology
7058 readers
143 users here now
News community around technology, social media platforms, information technology and governmental policy surrounding it.
What doesn't fit here?
The core of the story has to be technology focused.
- If article mentions "AI" in a sentence and then talks about business economics that doesn't make it tech news.
- Gaming is too many layers removed from technology. There are many dedicated communities that are a better fit for it.
- Transporation is too many layers removed from technology. EVs while use many cool technologies have many dedicated communities that are a better fit for it.
- Entertainment is too many layers removed from technology. While sometimes it can fit here, business or cultural aspects of it are a better fit for dedicated communities.
- Cybersecurity. While it heavily focuses on technology, most of the time it's too technical for most people who are not already invested in it. Should be posted in a dedicated communities unless it has broader connection to other tech areas.
Post guidelines
Title format
Post title should mirror the news source title. If you don't like the title of article, look for an alternative source instead of editorializing it.
URL format
Post URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.
[Opinion] prefix
Opinion (op-ed) articles must use [Opinion] prefix before the title. Opinion articles refer to articles that their publisher doesn't explictly endorse.
Country prefix
Country prefix can be added to the title with a separator (|, :, etc.) if the news is from a local publisher who doesn't clearly mention the country.
Rules
1. English only
Title and associated content has to be in English.
2. Use original link
Post URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.
3. Respectful communication
All communication has to be respectful of differing opinions, viewpoints, and experiences.
4. Inclusivity
Everyone is welcome here regardless of age, body size, visible or invisible disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, caste, color, religion, or sexual identity and orientation.
5. Ad hominem attacks
Any kind of personal attacks are expressly forbidden. If you can't argue your position without attacking a person's character, you already lost the argument.
6. Off-topic tangents
Stay on topic. Keep it relevant.
7. Instance rules may apply
If something is not covered by community rules, but are against lemmy.zip instance rules, they will be enforced.
Companion communities
!globalnews@lemmy.zip
!interestingshare@lemmy.zip
Icon attribution | Banner attribution
If someone is interested in moderating this community, message @brikox@lemmy.zip.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
What was the good side effects?
I know a lot people hate on this, but when I gave VR workstation a try (asi in, using VR for your second+ monitor) on my Quest 3, it was pretty nice.
At one point I was just taking my laptop to bed, passthrough block on my keyboard, and could comfortably work with 3 larger monitors. Or just plopping in bed with a controller, stream a large screen in front of me, and play a game.
Also, it's great for focus. Not having the rest of the world around you distracting you works wonders.
The Quest 3 was usable (the resolution sucked too much on Q2 to be able to use virtual monitors), but I can imagine it could get pretty tiring spending more than an hour or so in it - which is what I presume they could eventually solve. I'm excited for Steam Frame, assuming it will work as a standalone Linux computer. If I could just develop anywhere with my monitor setup, needing only the headset and a keyboard, it would be great.
Another thing are meetings. It's something you have to experience with an open mind, because it has been shoved into our throats under the Metaverse label, which made a lot of people adverse to it. I did give it a try, and it's such a huge difference between just staring at someone on a Zoom call. Just the fact that you have some kind of gesturing, along with the virtual dashboards that are easy to draw to (using the tip of the controller as a pen on your table, or just plopping a virtual blackboard agaist your wall), and it just makes the meetings and presentations so much better.
Again, you have the issue of the headsets being unwieldy for long term, but that's something they'd probably solve.
Of course, the whole Metaverse bullshit, and the way it was marketed and shoved down everyone's throat was stupid, but the technology in itself was pretty nice to use - I enjoyed the experience. It had it own problems, but that's something that could be solved.
Also, once I got into FPS in VR, it's really hard to enjoy regular flat screen FPSs. You need to have a magnetic gun stock for it to be playable, but once you get that, it's so much more fun. Just the fact that you have to actually change mags makes the experience so much better. It's something that is hard to describe, but just feels a lot better. In general, some of the best experiences gaming I had were in VR, but most of it was just a promise or tech demos, because the field didn't have time to mature, and was too unafordable for studios to take it seriously.
So, yeah, I think it had promise, and it's a shame the world has given up before it became affordable and iterated upon, especially since we traded it for bullshit AI.
Dunno why you're getting downvoted. Had a co-worker fully adopt a VR workplace set up, which saved on physical monitors. So the technology had promise, even in a professional setting.
I kind of get it, it's a thing that was extremely glorified by tech-bros as future of everything, before they moved over to AI, so everyone is alergic to that.
It's also something that sounds stupid until you try it, and that's hard to describe, and tbh my attempt to share the experience does sound like your regural run of the mill tech-bro speech, now that I read it again. I don't think it's possible to reasonably talk about things like these, because "and then I tried it and I was hooked! Of course it have its problems, but we will solve those" is exactly the techbro speech.
I'm as anti-bigtech as anyone here, and it's not like I live in VR and believe in the Metaverse, fuck that, and it's not like I have all my money in crypto and Meta stocks. I just honestly thought it was kinda cool the one time I tried it, and hope we'll get a more open alternatives once Meta finishes burning money on RaD it needs. Which I definitely can't say about crypto, AI, blockchain or NFTs.
They funded some of the best VR games ever made. Sure, their motivations behind it were to get kids addicted and be recording everything they see and say forever and have it all tied to their lame ass social media shit.... bit it gave me cool, fun shit to do.
No company really wants anything beyond endless profit and control.
My main point was that it was marginally better than what we traded it for with AI.
The AI furnace is fueled by burning children, and also makes everyone colder and more miserable, but you can make a lot of investor money promising to build more furnaces like that.
Oculus Studios published Beat Sabre, so I'll give you a pass.
Meta bought it, they didn't fund it or publish it.
They poured a LOT of money into game development, including support for third party studios. Most of the games they helped become a reality ended up with PCVR versions as well.
That's no longer a case though. Some time ago they pulled a plug on that, and shut down most of the studios they accquired in the meantime. Why do companies keep doing that?