Them existing and Google being able to enforce people turn them on, and consistently blocking everyone who doesn’t, is a whole other problem that is a lot more complex.
It’s not practically feasible because people will find ways around it. The app can require an eye tracking features to be turned on, but people will go to the browser site. If they get the people making a browser to integrate it, then people will use another browser. They’d have to block access on any mobile browser that doesn’t enforce it, and that’s a futile effort.
At least on IOS, they tried to lock Picture in Picture and background play behind a paywall, but that only worked in the app, and both features still work for the mobile site with a bit of fussing. Just because they implement restrictions and features doesn’t mean they can actually get them to work enough that people won’t glitch around them.
I remember playing with a similar feature on my Galaxy S3 back in the day. Eye scrolling. The phone would scroll for you when it sensed you looking at the bottom of the screen. That was the S3. It was not perfect but very usable. My hands always felt faster so I never kept it on but it was a fun thing to play with. I’m sure the only thing stopping them is the fear of backlash. We’ll get there in time I’m sure :/
See, I have no doubt they would if they could, but i doubt such things are actually feasible.
Like right now I just refresh the page to skip ads on my phone.
Camera eye-trackers exist
Hell, phones have them built in. Your iPhone literally knows not to dim the screen if it can see that your eyes are looking at it.
This isn’t exposed to the apps, however. Yet…
This is the primary reason I switched to iPhone. At least Apple’s business model is rooted in selling me overpriced gadgets rather than selling me.
They do both. ;)
I think some vr headsets have them so it’s not like you need a huge package either cus it’s 95% screen
Them existing and Google being able to enforce people turn them on, and consistently blocking everyone who doesn’t, is a whole other problem that is a lot more complex.
This is why it’s dangerous that YouTube’s company also makes Android.
It’s entirely feasible.
Amazon had full head tracking, including gaze, in the Fire Phone a decade ago.
I mean, it’s technically feasible, just not practically feasible, like flying cars.
It’s practically feasible, just not yet deemed profitable enough to do.
Flying cars are not practically feasible.
It’s not practically feasible because people will find ways around it. The app can require an eye tracking features to be turned on, but people will go to the browser site. If they get the people making a browser to integrate it, then people will use another browser. They’d have to block access on any mobile browser that doesn’t enforce it, and that’s a futile effort.
At least on IOS, they tried to lock Picture in Picture and background play behind a paywall, but that only worked in the app, and both features still work for the mobile site with a bit of fussing. Just because they implement restrictions and features doesn’t mean they can actually get them to work enough that people won’t glitch around them.
I remember playing with a similar feature on my Galaxy S3 back in the day. Eye scrolling. The phone would scroll for you when it sensed you looking at the bottom of the screen. That was the S3. It was not perfect but very usable. My hands always felt faster so I never kept it on but it was a fun thing to play with. I’m sure the only thing stopping them is the fear of backlash. We’ll get there in time I’m sure :/
The tech exist but enforcing that people use it is another matter. They cannot even properly paywall Picture in Picture and background play on IOS.