I stopped reading when you implied that Facebook invented pancake optics. They have been used in cameras for decades. And while I agree they're the way forward in the future, saying they let more light in is factually incorrect: they only let about 10-15% of the light through. This page has a good overview of why that is and how they work.
Ok, well I guess I'm sorry I fell into your trap and got one thing wrong. You wanted me to list a bunch of stuff off the top of my head, I'm just some random guy. It doesn't matter if the rest is right, I failed your test. I assumed since all the headsets with pancake lenses were so much brighter than the old ones without worse battery life that it must let more light through than the previous lens types did. But I guess it was some other advance in some other tech that let them run the screens 10x as bright at the same battery cost.
And I'm not sure what part made it sound like I thought they invented the very idea of pancake lenses. You wanted me to list the innovations they brought to VR. And making pancake lenses affordable for VR is very much a thing they did, by spending money. The money spent went to a company that was making them for other applications. But it was still money spent by meta to bring them to VR.
I may not have all the details perfect. But your take is that meta spending 25 billion dollars on progressing VR was unnoticeable and did nothing...
What? I didn't want you to list a bunch of things off the top of your head. I asked for one factual thing, and you instead you provided a bunch of assumptions. If you can't provide actual facts maybe just don't state guesses like they're true?
Sorry, I got from your "like what?" response to my statement that they had financed a wide variety of technologies for VR headsets that you wanted me to provide examples, not just one thing.
But when I was wrong about one of the things, it invalidated everything else anyway. So the other examples don't count anymore.
I didn't know it was supposed to be my thesis paper either. I'm sorry I didn't put hours of research into what I thought was a conversation. If you would have asked me to make sure my sources were cited I probably could have put more effort in. And maybe I would have found out that I guessed one thing wrong. One thing that didn't even actually matter towards the actual topic of the conversation, but that automatically invalidated all the other right things I said.
I drew the wrong conclusion from the screens being brighter, I assumed the lens must have helped with that, I will never make that mistake again. It turns out it was just some other tech advancement I previously didn't know about, but could have added to the list if I had done all the research you wanted.
I stopped reading when you implied that Facebook invented pancake optics. They have been used in cameras for decades. And while I agree they're the way forward in the future, saying they let more light in is factually incorrect: they only let about 10-15% of the light through. This page has a good overview of why that is and how they work.
Ok, well I guess I'm sorry I fell into your trap and got one thing wrong. You wanted me to list a bunch of stuff off the top of my head, I'm just some random guy. It doesn't matter if the rest is right, I failed your test. I assumed since all the headsets with pancake lenses were so much brighter than the old ones without worse battery life that it must let more light through than the previous lens types did. But I guess it was some other advance in some other tech that let them run the screens 10x as bright at the same battery cost.
And I'm not sure what part made it sound like I thought they invented the very idea of pancake lenses. You wanted me to list the innovations they brought to VR. And making pancake lenses affordable for VR is very much a thing they did, by spending money. The money spent went to a company that was making them for other applications. But it was still money spent by meta to bring them to VR.
I may not have all the details perfect. But your take is that meta spending 25 billion dollars on progressing VR was unnoticeable and did nothing...
What? I didn't want you to list a bunch of things off the top of your head. I asked for one factual thing, and you instead you provided a bunch of assumptions. If you can't provide actual facts maybe just don't state guesses like they're true?
Sorry, I got from your "like what?" response to my statement that they had financed a wide variety of technologies for VR headsets that you wanted me to provide examples, not just one thing.
But when I was wrong about one of the things, it invalidated everything else anyway. So the other examples don't count anymore.
I didn't know it was supposed to be my thesis paper either. I'm sorry I didn't put hours of research into what I thought was a conversation. If you would have asked me to make sure my sources were cited I probably could have put more effort in. And maybe I would have found out that I guessed one thing wrong. One thing that didn't even actually matter towards the actual topic of the conversation, but that automatically invalidated all the other right things I said.
I drew the wrong conclusion from the screens being brighter, I assumed the lens must have helped with that, I will never make that mistake again. It turns out it was just some other tech advancement I previously didn't know about, but could have added to the list if I had done all the research you wanted.