9

Neal Stephenson Explains Silicon Valley’s Latest Obsession | Vanity Fair

 2 years ago
source link: https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/06/neal-stephenson-metaverse-snow-crash-silicon-valley-virtual-reality
Go to the source link to view the article. You can view the picture content, updated content and better typesetting reading experience. If the link is broken, please click the button below to view the snapshot at that time.
The V.F. Interview

The Sci-Fi Guru Who Predicted Google Earth Explains Silicon Valley’s Latest Obsession

“Snow Crash” author Neal Stephenson talks to the Hive about the differences between augmented and virtual reality, how to create a convincing Metaverse, and why social media is driving us insane.
June 23, 2017
Photo by Brady Hall

Way back in 1992, author Neal Stephenson published his breakthrough novel, Snow Crash, a cyberpunk exploration of then-futuristic technologies: mobile computing, virtual reality, wireless Internet, digital currency, smartphones, and augmented-reality headsets. The book famously opens with a breakneck car chase as the main character, Hiro Protagonist (it’s something of a satire), races to deliver a pizza on time. It’s a literal life-or-death scene as our harried gig-economy driver races his GPS-enabled electric car through the streets of Los Angeles before he runs out the clock and risks angering the mob. TaskRabbit "independent contractors" can surely relate.

Twenty-five years later, Stephenson’s cult classic has become canon in Silicon Valley, where a host of engineers, entrepreneurs, futurists, and assorted computer geeks (including Amazon C.E.O. Jeff Bezos) still revere Snow Crash as a remarkably prescient vision of today’s tech landscape. Among the the more prophetic inventions in the book is something Stephenson called “the Metaverse”—the same sort of wireless, online virtual-reality experience that Facebook, Google, Samsung, and practically every other major tech company are now competing to commercialize.

In an interview, Stephenson told Vanity Fair that he was just “making shit up.” But the Metaverse isn’t the only element of Snow Crash that has earned him a reputation as a tech Nostradamus. He’s credited with predicting everything from our addiction to portable technology to the digitization of, well, everything, and you can thank him, not James Cameron, for bringing the Hindu concept of “avatar” into the everyday language. Google Earth designer Avi Bar-Zeev has said he was inspired by Stephenson’s ideas, and even tried to get the author to visit his office when he was working on Keyhole, an app suite that later served as a basis for Google’s mapping technology. “He wasn’t interested in visiting Keyhole, or didn’t have time. My best guess is that he was somewhat tired of hearing us engineering geeks rave about Snow Crash as a grand vision for the future. That may have something to do with Snow Crash being a dystopian vision.”

Dystopian or no, Stephenson’s vision of the future is almost here, and at least one tech company virtual-reality start-up Magic Leap, has snapped up Stephenson in an official capacity—he became its Chief Futurist in 2014. Here, with the benefit of 25 years of hindsight, Stephenson talked to the Hive about the differences between augmented and virtual reality, how to create a convincing Metaverse, and why social media is driving us apart.

Vanity Fair: As Silicon Valley competes to build the best Metaverse, do you think consumers will be drawn more toward immersive virtual-reality experiences, like the one Mark Zuckerberg is selling with Facebook’s Oculus headset, or augmented-reality gear, like Apple’s Tim Cook is interested in developing?

Neal Stephenson: I think that those two options are more different than a lot of people realize. You look at somebody wearing a VR rig on their head, and somebody wearing an AR rig, anything that’s on the market now, and those two people kind of look the same. But what they’re seeing and experiencing is completely different. If you’re in a VR simulation, every photo that’s hitting your eye, everything you see is a virtual object that’s rendered from scratch by a computer graphics system.

If you’re in an AR application, you are where you are. You’re in your physical environment, you’re seeing everything around you normally, but there’s additional stuff that’s being added. So VR has the ability to take you to a completely different fictional place—the kind of thing that’s described in the Metaverse in Snow Crash. When you go into the Metaverse, you’re on the street, you’re in the Black Sun, and your surroundings disappear. In the book, Hiro lives in a shabby shipping container, but when he goes to the Metaverse, he’s a big deal and has access to super high-end real estate. AR’s a whole different bag.

Do you see VR and AR as competitors, like VHS and Betamax, or are they distinct technology platforms?

Completely separate and almost unrelated. The purpose of VR is to take you to a completely made-up place, and the purpose of AR is to change your experience of the place that you’re in. That pervades everything in terms of how you think about content, how you tell stories, what it is that you can actually do with these devices.

There’s a discussion in Snow Crash about how realistically human faces need to be rendered in the Metaverse—a phenomenon we now refer to as the “uncanny valley.” In the book, Hiro argues that realism isn’t important, while the lone woman in the group, Juanita, advocates for more recognizable human faces. Do you agree with her and the ultimate premise of the book that recognizable humanity is a vital element of a satisfying VR experience?

I’m doing this thing where I have to try to re-inhabit the Neal of 25 years ago in order to answer that question. I think that particular question is still absolutely important to all of this. Twenty-five years ago, it seemed harder and therefore more pressing than it might seem right now. Looking at the computer graphics of the late 1990s, some really interesting things were happening, but facial animation was still in its pretty early days. We hadn’t yet seen Gollum in The Fellowship of the Ring. But today, it’s just expected that we can do faces and we can do them pretty well. So, for example, when a deceased performer, Peter Cushing, showed up in Rogue One, people were like, “Oh yeah, of course they can do that.” Maybe there’s some criticism about how well it was done, but it’s totally considered to be a solved problem right now. It's just obvious that you would want that.


About Joyk


Aggregate valuable and interesting links.
Joyk means Joy of geeK