PowerPCI don't think this will happen thanks to open initiatives like the Linked Open Data lod-cloud.net/

It will be increasingly hard to secure data without leaking it and at some point, there will be way more people embracing linked open data than rejecting it because you can do so much more with all the world's data in one place than storing it in your own private pot. Of course, companies might still choose to keep some data private, but that won't be the biggest pot anymore.

I certainly like to hope we will fully reach that point. I think it should be possible to both keep things linked up AND have accountability for how things are handled. Ideally, they go hand in hand. You almost can't have one without the other. That seems to be the problem ATM. We connect everything together, but there's no order to it. No standard that keeps it from being a mess that's easily taken advantage of.

robot zombieI certainly like to hope we will fully reach that point. I think it should be possible to both keep things linked up AND have accountability for how things are handled. Ideally, they go hand in hand. You almost can't have one without the other. That seems to be the problem ATM. We connect everything together, but there's no order to it. No standard that keeps it from being a mess that's easily taken advantage of.

I think we can get there. Very smart people are working on it as we speak like Tim Burners-Lee. I think he even invented the concept of linked data. Yea, that's the same guy who invented and programmed the internet alone as a "side project" in two months... :rockout:

But it's up to us to demand the data to be open. Especially governments that WE finance are really bad at this. Governments and regular people should be the ones who push this the most at first. Businesses will only follow when they see that it's much more powerful to have all data be open and available for everyone to use and for science.

PowerPCI think we can get there. Very smart people are working on it as we speak like Tim Burners-Lee. I think he even invented the concept of linked data. Yea, that's the same guy who invented and programmed the internet alone as a "side project" in two months... :rockout:

Information is power. Those in power aren't going to relinquish that power. They're going to pursue it in every avenue, in every nook and cranny. They're going to vacuum every bit and byte of data they can get their electronic spyware into. Even if it's not useful to them today they want it anyway just in case it will be useful to them tomorrow. AI supercomputing (especially quantum if they can get that really going) is going to make weaponizing that data easier, so no limitation is placed on how much is Hoovered and stored in Utah, the ever-expanding panopticon.

Meanwhile, Kool-Aid drinkers like so many in the ArsTechnica DNC/Hollywood/Apple echo chamber are going to downvote critical thinking into oblivion. They're already naively trying to push the narrative that Apple is some sort of benign savior instead of being a bloodsucking corporation like the rest of them. Echo chambers are spreading across the Internet. There is an employee at Disqus who posted the opinion that the path to a better happier online community is to have more censorship. When you question then you are "curated" with nice things like locked threads and blithe dismissals based on fallacies, such as "We discussed that already" — as if a faulty consensus is set in adamantium somewhere in the cosmos for them to point at.

Corporations were invented to siphon resources from ordinary people and the planet so that a small set of people can get much more life out of life. That's what they are. They are a conspiracy of exploitation and all of the censorship in the world can't erase that basic fact. They are not on your side, no matter how many shiny toys they will let you pay for.

Point being... if Burners-Lee comes up with a solution that benefits humanity (aka the plebs) more than it benefits the top .5% (the Bezos class) then it won't sell. Our handlers decide what sells. Money talks. The rest of us follow.

RichFInformation is power. Those in power aren't going to relinquish that power. They're going to pursue it in every avenue, in every nook and cranny. They're going to vacuum every bit and byte of data they can get their electronic spyware into. Even if it's not useful to them today they want it anyway just in case it will be useful to them tomorrow. AI supercomputing (especially quantum if they can get that really going) is going to make weaponizing that data easier, so no limitation is placed on how much is Hoovered and stored in Utah, the ever-expanding panopticon.

Meanwhile, Kool-Aid drinkers like so many in the ArsTechnica DNC/Hollywood/Apple echo chamber are going to downvote critical thinking into oblivion. They're already naively trying to push the narrative that Apple is some sort of benign savior instead of being a bloodsucking corporation like the rest of them. Echo chambers are spreading across the Internet. There is an employee at Disqus who posted the opinion that the path to a better happier online community is to have more censorship. When you question then you are "curated" with nice things like locked threads and blithe dismissals based on fallacies, such as "We discussed that already" — as if a faulty consensus is set in adamantium somewhere in the cosmos for them to point at.

Corporations were invented to siphon resources from ordinary people and the planet so that a small set of people can get much more life out of life. That's what they are. They are a conspiracy of exploitation and all of the censorship in the world can't erase that basic fact. They are not on your side, no matter how many shiny toys they will let you pay for.

Point being... if Burners-Lee comes up with a solution that benefits humanity (aka the plebs) more than it benefits the top .5% (the Bezos class) then it won't sell. Our handlers decide what sells. Money talks. The rest of us follow.

I wouldn't tack it up to an outright conspiracy... maybe a passive collusion. I.E., "Everyone knows the game." I don't think culture even factors in. What regular people say and do amongst each other means little when many governments essentially allow companies to buy power and influence.

It's the 'benevolent dictator' fallacy. It may be possible that someone may come along to wield power for good and usher in peace and prosperity. But that only ensures that at some point he will be overturned by someone who's lower scruples enable them to seize the upper hand again. Doesn't matter how many people the former benefits or how few the latter.

Or put another way... even grandma's best pie is no good to anyone if there are wolves in the den and ants in the kitchen. Honestly, deal with that and things might actually sort themselves out. But that would mean unifying bodies of power holding corporations to full fiscal and ethical accountability. Which is hard to imagine while the government is not only pocketing the taxes but turning a lot of tax money into a lot more money as a result of their influence on the economy...

RichFPoint being... if Burners-Lee comes up with a solution that benefits humanity (aka the plebs) more than it benefits the top .5% (the Bezos class) then it won't sell. Our handlers decide what sells. Money talks. The rest of us follow.

By that logic, nothing that is good for everybody like the internet could have ever become as big as it is. The existence and proliferation of the internet already are in stark contrast to your "doom and gloom" theory. So I believe you could make a positive counter-theory, that in fact, some ideas are just too powerful to be shut down. It also took the Internet a long while to build up and be as massive. At some point, it became so big and so available that it was simply impossible to ignore. I believe corporations wouldn't have wanted a free and open internet (they still are fighting it), but it's still free and open in most countries. So that goes against the theory that corporations can do anything about it. They of course would rather sell you certain "internet channels" with monthly payments like HBO to access only a part of sites in the world and restrict others in a central manner. Instead, the internet is pretty much unrestricted. Only the people hosting their sites can choose to restrict anything. The whole code behind the internet is also completely open and free thanks to only one person, Tim Berners-Lee.

That's the way data should be looked at and the way the idea of linked open data works. You can't restrict something that is inherently open-source and decentralized. It's also a more efficient way to hold data, so companies will use it and will integrate with it over time. They will have to embrace it like they had to embrace the internet. Governments can also mandate that certain data needs to be put in this open space like they already do now. Anything is possible from there. At some point, when this worldwide data becomes big enough, it will start to change how we think about the world data. It could be as big of a paradigm shift as we undoubtedly had with the internet. And literally THE inventor of the internet is behind this idea and thinks this should happen. And I think he has more credibility than anyone else on the planet. BUT it's a fairly new idea and needs US to make it as mainstream as it can be. We are still decades away from this happening, basically like it's 1989 for the internet.

PowerPCBy that logic, nothing that is good for everybody like the internet could have ever become as big as it is.

No, the plebs always get some benefits to keep them in compliance.

Law itself is the protection of elite privilege. All of the benefits we get from law stem from maintaining that privilege.

robot zombieI wouldn't tack it up to an outright conspiracy... maybe a passive collusion.

That's not possible as corporations are legal entities. That took the elites to craft and agree. It's not a passive matter at all.

RichFLaw itself is the protection of elite privilege. All of the benefits we get from law stem from maintaining that privilege.

That is a different discussion. I don't think that any sane person or not directly benefiting from it wants to change the laws to give corporations any more power than they already have. And how will they even stop something that is open and decentralized like the internet? I'm actually more skeptical about how they would stop it than how it will get built. Because it's already being built... Most people just don't know how to access it yet or don't even know linked open data exists. Most people were in the same state in the 90's when it comes to the internet. The internet only really exploded and became this cultural thing 10-15 years after it was possible to use it for the first time. So I'm skeptical how the hell "they" (the corporations) would go about stopping it, when they couldn't stop one guy before. I think this idea is much more powerful than whatever power corporations have. They would just never admit that, of course. But corporations for me are just a bunch of dumb headless monkeys running around in suits. This idea is like one Einstein who builds the atom bomb and drops it on them at some point in the future.

I have worked for corporations, I have seen from inside how inefficient and scatterbrained they do things. Behind the thin shiny veneer of marketing, there are nothing but headless monkeys running around in suits and trying to work as inefficiently as possible until they go home. There is nothing less scary that I would be afraid of than these people carrying out some grand conspiracy about anything successfully.

atavaxI felt paranoid avoiding a Occulus headset before they announced mandatory facebook accounts; and feel completely vindicated after it was announced. Sorry, No facebook account and no occulus products for life.

there wasn't a reason to not buy it to some extent, I bought one, don't regret it.
I won't be buying a new one from them for sure as now I will be forced, but as I never have to use facebook login for my purchase it's good enough.

I've been smart enough to not buy a single item in the occulus store.

Facebook... what a cancer to the humanity.

robot zombieWhat people seem to be missing here is that facebook already owns the data from thier oculus accounts. The changes just make the link more obvious to the end user. Already snuck that in on ya. Oopsie :rolleyes:

That is actually a great point.

However, I don't recall giving over any really sensitive information for the Oculus account and I don't think I even bothered setting up a payment method or two factor authentication. So the info is a relitively small profile with respect to what some people may put on facebook,....errrr,......I mean the evil empire.

Another point that may have escape notice is that the evil empire (facebook) has quite a bit of buying power and could easily buy a great number of different companies at any given time. Therefore one must always be vigilant and safeguarding their personal info at every turn. If your info is out there, companies can buy it directly too.

DemonicRyzen666I doubt it even the "portal" just mentions agreeing with Facebook's terms of service policy. It's not even on the nod other than that.

The evil empire has made it very clear at this point in their own blog:

What changes are coming to accounts on Oculus?

Starting in October 2020:

• Everyone using an Oculus device for the first time will need to log in with a Facebook account.
• If you are an existing user and already have an Oculus account, you will have the option to log in with Facebook and merge your Oculus and Facebook accounts.
• If you are an existing user and choose not to merge your accounts, you can continue using your Oculus account for two years.

Starting In January 2023:

• We will end support for Oculus accounts.
• If you choose not to merge your accounts at that time, you can continue using your device, but full functionality will require a Facebook account.
• We will take steps to allow you to keep using content you have purchased, though some games and apps may no longer work. This could be because they require a Facebook account or because a developer has chosen to no longer support the app or game you purchased.

All future unreleased Oculus devices will require a Facebook account, even if you already have an Oculus account.

Once again, most people that already have a current Oculus VR HMD will likely be moving on to a new one in due time, just like many gamers will be moving on to a new RTX 3090, 3080, 3070 video card, PS5 or XBox Series X.

So again, I won't likely buy another Oculus device after this but I'm not worried about it now on my current Oculus Quest. My old Oculus Rift is now just a quasi nostalgic bit of tech (like an iomega Zip Drive) and the Quest will also be that by 2023.

It should also be pointed out that there is a high demand for VR HMDs. Anyone that has a recent model VR HMD may still be able to sell it "used" at the same price as if it were new. This includes Oculus products VR HMDs.

DRDNAfacebook is the only reason I'm hard passing all Oculus products and getting the new HP Reverb G2 Virtual Reality Headsetb :laugh:

Lol same here... :)

OctaveanGood question and some people might have a legit / legal argument against it. However, those who already have an Oculus product and Oculus account are grandfathered in until at least some time in 2023. It's new users (presumably with new retail packaging / documentation) that are better informs of the evil empires forced requirements that have to deal with this.

good that I created a oculus account a year back when I got the oculus go.Hope I don’t need FB account. I did get a message on my oculus phone app saying I can do more with login to FB from settings menu.. which I will never do..

1freedudeUh, bullshit. I have had s1, s2, avant, note 4, note edge. All were rooted to remove goog and fb. The only time my phone had fb crapware was when it was attached to gearvr, and auto downloaded. Then I got rid of it again and learned about SideloadVR

The fact that you have to root to remove tells a lot.

saikamaldossLol same here... :)



good that I created a oculus account a year back when I got the oculus go.Hope I don’t need FB account. I did get a message on my oculus phone app saying I can do more with login to FB from settings menu.. which I will never do..

Yeah, they will try to get grandfathered Oculus accounts to link to facebook voluntarily for now. In a couple of years it will be compulsory but they cannot force the issue with existing users / accounts.

OctaveanYeah, they will try to get grandfathered Oculus accounts to link to facebook voluntarily for now. In a couple of years it will be compulsory but they cannot force the issue with existing users / accounts.

thank I will create a new email and FB account the .. lol. They don’t ask for DL to verify while creating an account.

But I am looking forward to HP reverb 2.. I can’t use oculus anyway because of the low res screen after using my HP reverb pro.. I should say, hp sks when it comes to controllers and battery life... won’t last 2 days.. also not happy about current VR FOV...

A VR headset that requires a login to use is like those kitchen appliances that won't work until you log into the manuf's system with their smart phone app. Don't buy that junk. All of it quits working eventually.

xorbeA VR headset that requires a login to use is like those kitchen appliances that won't work until you log into the manuf's system with their smart phone app. Don't buy that junk. All of it quits working eventually.

I agree but only to a point.

The Oculus Quest is a unique VR HMD in that it was introduced as a stand alone gaming product which meant it was akin to any other self contained gaming system such as an XBox, PS4, Switch, nVidia Shield and so on. Such devices have login credentials for the device as a typical requirement and their own store for games. So noting now in this respect and certainly not junk barbecue of their authentication system and ability to use an online store (walled garden).

The major difference being that the Oculus Quest doesn't have an option for optical or solid state game media although stand alone consoles seem to be trying to go in that direction (PS5 for example).

I suspect it wouldn't take much (or nothing at all) to maintain the existing Steam VR functionality though. The addition of PC tethering through Oculus Link really increased the functionality of the Oculus Quest.

Still as I have said before, after a year or two of use, most people will likely be looking to upgrade their VR HMD just like they would be looking to upgrade their video card. So there is no need to act like these are devices that would be in use forever. If they already have an Oculus VR HMD, they are grandfathered in for a number of years and if they don't have one at this late date they likely never will so nothing ventured and nothing gained.

There is also some indication that the current Oculus Quest which was hard to keep in stock will be discontinued. In other words the end of the products life is coming to a close soon. Its speculated that the new model, which image's have been making the rounds, will in fact replace the current Oculus Quest.

xorbeA VR headset that requires a login to use is like those kitchen appliances that won't work until you log into the manuf's system with their smart phone app. Don't buy that junk. All of it quits working eventually.

We're all renters and corporations have realized that gadgets will get people to fork over more of themselves than ever before. Everything is a subscription these days, including tactics like Microsoft turning off activation servers for Office so you can't reinstall the product you purchased. Things like that should be illegal but they aren't.

Someone gave me a Samsung speaker and it demands, not requests, that I turn on location tracking to use it. Samsung's software also doesn't work in versions of iOS newer than 9 or so (and newer versions of macOS), making it impossible to set up the wireless with an Apple device. Planned obsolescence is becoming so fast that it's hysterical, and not in a good way.

Also, the quality of implementations is so poor these days. For example, you have to use Samsung's walled garden app (that the company doesn't bother to keep current) to use the speaker with wifi. You can't just connect to it directly with your router. If you try it asks for a password and most of the time it doesn't appear in the network list at all. Because the speaker can't be used normally with wifi you are locked out of doing things like playing audio from Youtube through the speaker via wifi. Every avenue for playing audio via wifi, other than from the local music library, is through some portal that requires a username, password, and subscription. It's completely absurd but fits perfectly with the mentality from corporations these days. Your needs don't matter. The desires of the corporation come first. You will get only the bare minimum and only for a short time, to fool you into parting with your money.

To corporations we're squatters with credit cards.

Yeah the JBL app to change the color on the BT speaker demands location services. I installed it, set the color, and immediately deleted it. I have to use a second phone to access the parking garage at work. Because the parking garage access app runs location services 24/7, and clogs up the notification bar. So I turn on the spare phone a block from work each day. Every company thinks they own your phone.