Jaron Lanier on Virtual Reality, AI, Social Media, and the Human Experience of Reality

Jaron Lanier, a pioneer in virtual reality, shares his unique perspective on the technology, emphasizing that the most valuable aspect of VR is the transition *back* to physical reality, which refreshes senses and highlights the strangeness and delicacy of the real world. He argues that media technology, including VR, serves to help humans appreciate the flaws in simulations and thus value reality more deeply. Lanier also expresses skepticism about the concept of "AI" as a conscious entity, preferring to view algorithms as tools created and controlled by humans, rather than independent creatures. A core distinction Lanier makes is between the "software" nature of virtual worlds—which he describes as messy, arbitrary, and a slave to its own history—and the physical world, which is not fully understood but possesses an inherent, non-programmable complexity. He challenges the notion of a fixed human perception of reality, illustrating with historical examples how early media (wire recorders, crude video conferencing, civil war photography) were initially perceived as indistinguishable from reality, but human perception evolved to discern their flaws, thereby enhancing appreciation for the real. He also differentiates between the broad idea of the universe as "some kind of computer" (which he finds coherent) and modeling it as a Turing machine (which he finds deceptive and practically inaccessible). Lanier is a staunch critic of current social media platforms, not primarily due to advertising, but because of their "manipulative economy" and the "cognitive access blackmail scheme" they represent, which he believes makes people "nuts" and potentially threatens survival. He advocates for subordinating algorithms and being skeptical of them, drawing parallels to the "invisible hand" of economics, which, despite its theoretical appeal, requires human intervention (Keynesianism) to prevent societal screw-ups. He suggests that technologies like musical instruments or his "together mode" for video conferencing can promote empathy and connection when designed with human well-being in mind, contrasting this with the current social media model. The conversation delves into the human fear of death, with Lanier connecting it to philosophical approaches to consciousness. He observes that both sentimental dualism (hope for a soul's survival) and hardcore computationalism (hope for uploading consciousness to live forever) are often driven by the same underlying fear of mortality, framing the latter as a modern form of "medieval Christianity." This leads to a discussion of the "circle of empathy," where pragmatic decisions are made about what entities are granted consciousness and consideration. Lanier argues that extending empathy to AI (as a conscious entity) would lead to incompetence in engineering and design, emphasizing the need for humans to maintain agency and control over their creations.

I have always found the very most valuable moment in virtuality to be the moment when you take off the headset and your senses are refreshed and you perceive physicality uh afresh.

The magic is and perhaps forever will be in the physical world.

Software is always the slave of its own history its own legacy it's always um infinitely arbitrarily messy and arbitrary.

Maybe the greatest gift of photography is that we can see the flaws in a photograph and appreciate reality more.

I hope that the experience of virtual worlds helps people appreciate this this physical world we have and feel tender towards it and and uh keep it from getting too fucked up.

I don't believe in ai I don't think there's any ai there's just algorithms we make them we control them now they're tools they're not creatures.

The thing about this circle is it can't be pure faith it also has it's also a pragmatic decision and this is where things get complicated if you try to make it too big you suffer from incompetence.

If you include ai you make yourself you you exclude yourself from being able to be a good engineer or designer and so you're facing incompetence immediately.

The thing about the invisible hand is absolutely everybody has some line they draw where they say no no no we're going to take control of this thing.

It's more like a cognitive access blackmail payment at this point like you just to be connected you're paying the money.