Last week, American defense technology company Anduril announced a surprising new partnership: it will be working with Meta to develop virtual reality (VR) and augmented reality (AR) headsets for the United States military. This collaboration prompts questions, especially considering the complex history between the two companies and the implications of integrating immersive technologies into military operations.
At first glance, the partnership might seem an unlikely one. Anduril’s founder, Palmer Luckey, was also the founder of Oculus — the VR company that Meta (then Facebook) acquired in 2014 for $2 billion. Luckey was subsequently fired from Facebook and established Anduril, a company renowned for its autonomous surveillance systems and AI-enabled drones, developed for militaries, including the United States and Australia. Luckey’s vision for this new partnership between Meta and the U.S. military reflects his longstanding ambition: “My mission has long been to turn warfighters into technomancers,” he wrote on X, “and the products we are building with Meta do just that.”
Palmer Luckey, founder of Anduril Industries, during an interview at Anduril’s headquarters in Costa Mesa, California, on 14 December 2023. (Photographer: Kyle Grillot / Bloomberg via Getty Images)
While this partnership is new, the integration of VR and AR into military contexts is far from novel. The roots of immersive technology are deeply entangled with the history of warfare, illustrating a trajectory from early innovations to modern applications.
A History of Violence
The evolution of VR is closely linked with the militarized history of computing. During World War II, the push for advancements in aerial defense and ballistics encouraged innovations aimed at enhancing human perception and reaction times. Research in cybernetics sought to understand the relationship between human cognition and machines, particularly regarding how to augment human abilities under pressure.
One of VR’s early pioneers, Ivan Sutherland, developed “The Ultimate Display” in the 1960s—a precursor to AR headsets designed for helicopter use. Sutherland’s work was heavily funded by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), the military’s advanced research branch. His project received support from Bell Helicopter, a contractor for the U.S. military during the Vietnam War, exemplifying how military needs have historically shaped technological advancements.
In the ensuing decades, immersive display systems became integral to Air Force training and simulation programs throughout the 1970s and 1980s. This was complemented by the development of early haptic technologies, enabling remote manipulation of objects—key tools that enriched operators’ capabilities in combat scenarios.
HoloLens 2, an AR headset designed by Microsoft, exhibited during the Mobile World Congress, on 28 February 2019 in Barcelona, Spain. (Photographer: Joan Cros / NurPhoto via Getty Images)
Military applications remain among the most well-funded and actively developed uses of immersive tech. For instance, in 2022, Microsoft secured a nearly $22 billion contract with the U.S. Army to provide 120,000 HoloLens AR headsets for battlefield use—a program eventually scaled back, with Anduril taking over the responsibility in 2024. The U.S. military has also sought to incorporate VR for training, as evidenced by investments in a “Synthetic Training Environment.”
Unlike many other major tech firms—referred to as the “Magnificent Seven”—Meta had mostly steered clear of the military until this recent announcement. Despite investing over $45 billion in immersive tech since 2018, a clear consumer market for VR remains elusive. Reports estimate around 20 million Quest headsets sold since their 2019 debut, indicating a scant foothold in consumer electronics. While Meta’s smart glasses have garnered some interest, they currently lack comprehensive AR capabilities and raise ongoing concerns about safety and privacy.
Why the Pivot to Military Applications?
In the landscape of tech development, particularly in the absence of mass-market adoption, many firms seek institutional avenues to validate and generate demand for their products. The defense sector offers a particularly appealing opportunity. Collaborating with militaries can provide access to substantial budgets that help subsidize research and development, while simultaneously creating pathways for embedding new technologies within critical infrastructure. Historically, numerous now-ubiquitous technologies, including computing and the internet, emerged from military investments.
Meta may well be attempting to cultivate a sense of necessity for its technology. When widespread consumer demand falls short, the logical step is to embed that technology firmly elsewhere—be it workplaces, educational environments, or on the battlefield.
What’s at Stake?
One significant question is whether Luckey’s vision of AR- and VR-equipped “technomancers” can actually be realized. Early reports following Microsoft’s military headset deployments indicated soldiers experiencing nausea, disorientation, and eye strain. Beyond these physiological effects, challenges remain regarding the reliability and ethical implications of embedded technologies like facial recognition and battlefield AI, known for their potential biases, opacity, and susceptibility to errors. Caution is warranted when integrating such systems into advanced AR and VR technologies.
A member of the Saarland Parliament tries out a mobile extended reality system from HGXR for training security forces using AI-supported virtual reality, at the 28th European Police Congress in Berlin, Germany. (Photographer: Bernd von Jutrczenka / picture alliance via Getty Images)
Furthermore, the societal implications of militarized technology are cause for concern. As we’ve seen with many other advancements, tools developed for defense often find their way into civilian contexts. Current examples include the adoption of immersive technologies by police forces, such as AR-equipped smart glasses for identifying threats and VR-based “empathy training” for law enforcement.
The geographer Stephen Graham describes this trend as the “militarization of everyday life,” where technologies and tactics employed in war infiltrate civil governance systems. The very immersive technologies designed for combat could influence urban policing, workforce training, or citizen monitoring methods. As demonstrated in an ongoing research project titled “Governing Immersive Technology,” there is an urgent need for evidence-based policies to guide the responsible evolution of immersive technologies. This includes anticipating potential risks, preventing harm, and fostering inclusive, ethical innovation.
Meta’s CTO Andrew Bosworth shared on X: “The computing platform of the future will be built on AI and AR.” As the landscape continues to evolve, an essential question persists: whose future will it shape, and at what cost?
Ben Egliston is a Senior Lecturer in Digital Cultures at the University of Sydney and an Australian Research Council DECRA Fellow.
Marcus Carter is Professor in Human–Computer Interaction at the University of Sydney and an Australian Research Council Future Fellow.
They are the authors of Fantasies of Virtual Reality: Untangling Fiction, Fact, and Threat.
