For me it depends on who controls it really, say Amazon becomes the skynet and creates such seamless vr I will never even try it out, resisting isnt too difficult im that case

I question the ethics of ruling over AI subjects and the premise of "anything goes".

Read "Infinite" by Jeremy Robinson. It's a Sci-fi novel that explores a bit that idea.

I'd jump in, but i would still need a crafted experience. I find designing my own sandbox to be a bit dull. Remember the last season of the Good Place? Turns out infinite wish fulfilment might not be that effective at making us happy. And it certainly won't help us to develop.

But if there are fun, designed experiences that are engaging and challenging to do inside this realm, sign me the fuck up.

Question though: how is time experienced on the inside? Because if our virtual experiences happen faster than real time we could get some real world advantages by studying and training in virtual.

Probably if it's a San Junipero situation.

Ready Player One Matrix And maybe others but I don't know.

It would be extremely hard to resist. Such tech may be expensive, tho it could still be owned by poorer people once it decreases in cost, as it would allow to escape their poorness.

Tho because mostly companies will do things like that, I mostly see something like in Ready Player One. Where you have a giant social network/game, where you can participate in plenty of different activities which can look like the real world, or not.

The Matrix version where you are in a world filled with "real people"/AI, where you have the same world but have some super powers, well not really sure. Do you really want to have powers, what to do with them?

It's also difficult to get a world like that. Social interactions are pretty much needed for most people. Even if these people don't see it directly, getting out, buying something, it's social interaction. If those AI people aren't good, the experience would most likely be mediocre because of the objective it implies (recreating a similar world but where you can do anything). Tho maybe if it is used as a game, maybe it could interest more people.

However it would enphasis the social distancing of many people and break many things. This is why I'd rather see it as like a social media/game universe.

Another issue in the question now is well, there is no such thing. So it's difficult to even know if it would be interesting or not. Would we be absorbed all day in it like people were in Ready Player One? Will companies try to control us? Make us buy things?

I think it would be great to try out things that are impossible in the real world without any risks. Not necessarily crazy things, but things that are just not available to me irl. Like designing stuff without any limits of ressources or money. That way we could improve the real world by testing things in the virtual.

It quickly turns into a philosophical question of what you really want to do in the real world and why. It doesn't make much sense to better your real world for things that could be easily done in the virtual. However, since your life even in the virtual world depends on your real survival, there would still be things to do.

Then there's also the thing that your virtual world would be limited to your own imagination. At some point, that will get boring even with virtual people around. It would still make sense to exchange ideas with actual people in order to expand your own virtual world.

I would jump in head first. Anything that will make me run from this reality.

I think there is a flaw in these kinds of arguments and that is the assumption that a perfect simulation would even be desirable. Why not enhance it with abilities like teleportation, third person views, searches and other HUD-like UI elements,...? I can tell from years of using Second Life that those don't ruin immersion nearly as much as VR-proponents seem to think.

We could and we should. "Real world" will deteriorate socially, enviromentally and architecturally if real VR becomes popular.