Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: How is the “metaverse” concept different from the Second Life boom?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 381 posts

Re: Ask HN: How is the “metaverse” concept different from the Second Life boom?

#241

Post by jonnycomputer »

gfodor wrote: post #200
somewhereoutth wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Until we can see each other's faces in VR, this won't work for social presence. Shrinking everything down to contact lenses (even sunglasses get in the way of social contact) is likely to be beyond us for quite some while if ever. I'd rather not put something in my eye anyway. Further, VR does not work well for switching - you can't be in VR and scribble notes at the same time. AR might be an improvement, but not by…

What you’re posting here is “common knowledge”, but it is actually in conflict with social presence research. VR beats video conferencing even without any facial tracking, and the abject failure of video conferencing in the pandemic to replace most of the feeling of face to face communication should be enough to convince people there is merit to the studies that have been done showing it scores poorly. In VR you mult…

And the actual benefit of the feeling of face to face communication is?

Re: Ask HN: How is the “metaverse” concept different from the Second Life boom?

#242

Post by johnny53169 »

gfodor wrote: post #200
somewhereoutth wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Until we can see each other's faces in VR, this won't work for social presence. Shrinking everything down to contact lenses (even sunglasses get in the way of social contact) is likely to be beyond us for quite some while if ever. I'd rather not put something in my eye anyway. Further, VR does not work well for switching - you can't be in VR and scribble notes at the same time. AR might be an improvement, but not by…

What you’re posting here is “common knowledge”, but it is actually in conflict with social presence research. VR beats video conferencing even without any facial tracking, and the abject failure of video conferencing in the pandemic to replace most of the feeling of face to face communication should be enough to convince people there is merit to the studies that have been done showing it scores poorly. In VR you mult…

> In VR you multitask by bringing the computing environment into the virtual environment. So there is no deficit there.

Writing/typing would be really bad in VR though, and that's a major need for meetings, I don't see a good solution for that.

Re: Ask HN: How is the “metaverse” concept different from the Second Life boom?

#244

Post by gfodor »

tomc1985 wrote: post #229
charlesju wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree this is one facet, but other is we now have a trustless ownership protocol (ie. cryto + NFTs) that will lay the foundation for people "caring" about the stuff and status you have in the metaverse.

Yes let's crystalize greed and avarice into our brave new virtual meta world thing How about a virtual world of no ownership? Why must we give the wealthy yet another venue to lord their status over us?

The ultimate scarcity is human attention and creativity - so in the limit that will always be a thing that is a form of wealth. The ownership of digital assets (NFTs or not) is fundamentally an output of a system where someone chooses to expend creative energy into making the asset, and traded that opportunity cost off based on the expected outcome. A scenario where that work would not be something they could capture value from by enforcement mechanisms of scarcity would lead to some of these efforts not happening. (Not all of course, many people do amazing CC licensed work. But it doesn’t pay the bills.)

Re: Ask HN: How is the “metaverse” concept different from the Second Life boom?

#245

Post by bink »

ravenstine wrote: post #206
tjpnz wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Overall, I think Silicon Valley is overestimating people's willingness to wear headsets and paddles for extended periods of time. I think the issue is that a significant portion of the population will have issues consuming the content and not ending up with eye strain or getting sick. It was one of the factors which killed off the resurgence of 3D in the 2010s and VR headsets suffer from many of the same problems. B…

To be fair, after motion pictures was initially invented, audiences are legitimately frightened by things that were happening on-screen. Yet here we are today with over 100 years of cinematic history and nearly everyone watching some form of entertainment at home. I have a feeling that future generations will simply know how to mentally process VR in a way that fully grown adults can't easily adapt to.

Unless we come up with a way to override the inner ear I can't see future generations being able to mentally process away the sickness that comes with VR motion.

Re: Ask HN: How is the “metaverse” concept different from the Second Life boom?

#246

Post by gfodor »

woodruffw wrote: post #228
gfodor wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The value is that the blockchains (or analogous tech) maximize durability and odds of societal consensus across time and space. For example, I would put higher odds on the Ethereum blockchain still existing and being citable in a century or two than most centralized authorities today. (These may be low odds in absolute terms, but in relative terms I think the Ethereum chain wins.)

I can only speak for myself, but I do not feel any particular predilection towards "social consensus" when I'm told that a think has cryptocurrencies mixed into it. If anything, it's a negative signal that tells me that someone has undisclosed financial interests in whatever they're trying to tell me about.

Sure, the argument made by crypto people is that is a transitional condition and in a few decades society at large will in general consider information on blockchains (or their descendants) as authoritative in many situations.

Re: Ask HN: How is the “metaverse” concept different from the Second Life boom?

#247

Post by brundolf »

monkzero wrote: post #120
brundolf wrote: post #54

My question with the metaverse concept is always, "Why? What's the point?" I can think of two parties that have their own answers: 1) A certain group of people who like computers and grew up reading sci-fi think it would be cool; some even tell themselves it's very important, but for vague reasons that they can't really articulate 2) Centers of capital are interested in it as yet another platform for consumption, att…

Books told stories for ages, but movies enhanced the experience and created a new breed of people who pre movies over books. Similarly we use phones for all our purposes, xr will enhance it

The difference is that your phone is a utility, not a piece of art. So XR would have to be more practical than the current interface, which, maybe advanced AR will be. But even then, that's just an AR GUI, not a "metaverse".

And then on the non-utilitarian side, XR entertainment/storytelling is already a thing. You don't need a metaverse for that.

Re: Ask HN: How is the “metaverse” concept different from the Second Life boom?

#248

Post by tehbeard »

shafyy wrote: post #180
gfodor wrote: post #146

It’s simple really, and most commenters don’t “get” what is going on with all this. Remote communication tools like video conferencing fail to deliver what academics call “social presence”, which is the feeling of being together in unmediated communication. VR and AR have the necessary capabilities to do so, and deliver social presence on par with face to face. With a fully immersive experience, you can feel like you…

I agree that social presence is the most underrated aspect of VR, especially from people who have never tried it. Of course, it's not there yet, but if you experience it today you can see glimpses of how it will be in the future. However, that has nothing to do with the "metaverse". Metaverse is just a fancy word Facebook is trying to establish to somehow rebrand their walled-off social media platforms.

> ... social presence is the most underrated aspect of VR ... Of course, it's not there yet, ...

All this "body language" talk neglects that vr tracks at most your head and hands. Not how people are stood, or even facial expressions. "Body language" indeed. Too day nothing of the whirly Hurley motion sickness from it.

Maybe one day, but I put it in the same bucket as fusion.

Re: Ask HN: How is the “metaverse” concept different from the Second Life boom?

#249

Post by tomc1985 »

gfodor wrote: post #244
tomc1985 wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes let's crystalize greed and avarice into our brave new virtual meta world thing How about a virtual world of no ownership? Why must we give the wealthy yet another venue to lord their status over us?

The ultimate scarcity is human attention and creativity - so in the limit that will always be a thing that is a form of wealth. The ownership of digital assets (NFTs or not) is fundamentally an output of a system where someone chooses to expend creative energy into making the asset, and traded that opportunity cost off based on the expected outcome. A scenario where that work would not be something they could capture…

But digital is a realm of infinite copying, and where true ownership of bits means that you can never show them off (like Shkreli and that A Tribe Called Quest album). NFT 'ownership' is an additional layer on top of the data that can easily be stripped away, as the exclusivity only exists in the minds of those gullible enough to actually value it.

I am very tired of watching humans constantly try to impose real-world economic scarcity into a digital land of infinite plenty. Rather than fight the nature of a digital economy, why not embrace it?

Re: Ask HN: How is the “metaverse” concept different from the Second Life boom?

#250

Post by buu700 »

gfodor wrote: post #216
ghaff wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone who spends way too much time on video--including meetings I should be in in case something directly relevant to me comes up but mostly can pay partial attention to while I do stuff on another computer--I would mostly hate the idea of wearing a headset. Heck, at in person meetings for better or worse, a lot of people do the same thing. High-fidelity, lifesize, no stuttering, etc. plus collaborative docs and…

Yeah the headsets are a distraction, the way to think about this is there are three distinct tech tracks: - full photonic override (HMDs -> passthrough visors (lynx-r is a half step) -> passthrough swim goggles -> contact lenses) - partial photonic override (HoloLens -> AR glasses -> contact lenses) - magic windows (google’s thing) They all have trade offs but the first track in particular it is an error to look at c…

Rather than contact lenses, how plausible would it be to project an image into someone's eyes from a distance?

As in you'd have an external VR unit that's as bulky as needed to handle face tracking, photonic override, etc. without any direct physical contact or uncomfortable accessories. Does that kind of tech sound further or closer than contact lenses, or would it be so different as to be hard to say?

Post reply on HN