Much of the media has spent the past week preoccupied with the mysterious disappearance of a privately owned submersible that supposedly exploded while visiting the wrecked Titanic.
I wanted to share what seemed like a novel interpretation, but one that I felt was very important.
The disappearance of Ocean Gate’s submersible “Titan” and the dedication of sufficient resources to the discovery of the vessel and its five passengers resulted in theextreme tourism” industry – usually expensive treks done by wealthy people or those well-connected to some of the most dangerous regions on earth (and beyond).
As people look for safer ways to explore, I can’t help but think that this terrifying scenario is why the concept of the metaverse, a virtual world accessible via some sort of wearable device, will never go away. not. I was happy to see this mentioned in his Axios this week, although it seems like an afterthought.
Texas A&M University professor James Petrick, who studies tourism and recreation, told Axios that the Metaverse is a good alternative for thrill seekers.
“Death removes but still gives excitement,” He said.
For over a year now, I’ve been writing about the emerging world of virtual reality on The ReidOut Blog. And why is this idea even though its most vocal proponent, meta owner Mark Zuckerberg (to the delight of many critics), seems to be struggling to get the plan off the ground? I also wrote about whether is worth it.
But I think Titan’s horrifying disappearance is a perfect time to explain why we need something that many people tend to ignore these days.
In my view, as long as there are people paying hundreds of thousands of dollars to visit the remotest corners of the planet, the demand for safer, cheaper, and more widely accessible means is manifest or not. Regardless, it will always exist. There.
Indeed, it may mean that we need to invest in developing better submersibles. Or maybe we should invest heavily in technology that allows more people to explore these places without actually being there. I see this incident as an access issue as much as a safety issue. Likewise, why should such an in-depth experience as visiting this historic building be limited to those with the most money, or those with the physical stamina to take part in this trip?
Personally, I don’t want to be on a submarine. And I suspect many others share this idea as well. But I think this tragic incident gave us an opportunity, indeed a mission, to invent. safety A way for people to satisfy their adventurous and educational needs.
I have been moved and deeply sympathetic to hear nautical experts on television describe the Titan passengers as curious adventurers. Or simply as people fascinated by the world around them.
At its best, I think technology brings us closer to that world and helps us understand it more deeply. And that doesn’t necessarily have to mean visiting the place in person. In some cases, for safety reasons, you shouldn’t.
Want to go two miles to the ocean for a field trip? Absolutely not. But if I drop a high-tech camera in there that lets me walk around the Titanic and strap VR goggles to my head, I’m sure I’ll be addicted to the experience. And I know I’m not alone in that regard.