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

261–270 of 381 posts

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

#261

Post by sweetdreamerit »

teucris wrote: post #222
gfodor wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Interesting. Links to research?

The literature I know defines social presence as something that has only partially to do with technology (and Virtual Reality) [0]. The advantage of VR is that it can enhance the sense of immersivity in some circumstances [1]. [0] https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01587919.2017.13... [1] https://scholarspace.manoa.hawaii.edu/handle/10125/50061

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

#262

Post by gfodor »

dathinab wrote: post #259
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…

> fail to deliver what academics call “social presence”, which is the feeling of being together in unmediated communication Do they fail? I don't thinks so, when I e.g. play D&D like games over voice only chat + a shared map it totally convoys the "felling of being together" (just one of many examples). On the other side when in-person sitting in a conference room where a person takes 30min to convey some (for me) mo…

You quoted half of my definition. Google it.

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

#263

Post by dathinab »

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…

The ting is the "felling together" part is less dependent on the medium (real workd, audio, video, VR) but on the way the meeting is held.

Video conferencing didn't fail because video conferencing is fundamentally bad but because:

- meetings are often done in a fundamental bad way, where people don't have any "felling together" even is they sit physically in the same room.

- people having bad microphones, the video part in a video conference is the least important the audio part is what makes it work or fail (because meetings are all about speaking, except if you are mute/deaf, in which case VR might help).

- technical difficulties all over the place, there is no reason for this to get better with VR

- peoples homes being fundamental unsuited for conferences (i.e. a lot of background noise), again nothing which will change with VR

- also VR headsets and mimic don't work well together, proper gestic is possible but often requires full body tracking which put more requirements to the environment you use it in.

- VR headsets are much more straining to use then audio-only conferences, and somewhat more straining then video conferences. Which can be a major no-go for anyone doing many conferences, like the management deciding weather or not to buy into it.

- Companies want virtual meeting rooms not a meta-verse, something which already exists, and looks better then the honestly crappy looking thinks Facebook presented.

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

#264

Post by dathinab »

gfodor wrote: post #256
mulderc wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given that several of the largest and wealthiest companies (google and Microsoft) in the world can’t make decent chat apps and meta seems unable to make a product that doesn’t incite ethnic tensions around the world. I’m skeptical of such organizations to solve many of these issues.

The progression from DK1 to Quest 2 proves that effective technological miracles are in the reach of Facebook’s VR group. It’s pretty insane what has been done so far.

You need to separate technical progression of VR headsets from the whole meta-verse idea.

It's out of question that Facebook (and other companies) did a good job in progressing VR headsets technology (through I wouldn't call it a miracle).

But the meta-verse idea as presented by Facebook doesn't look too promising IMHO. It looks out of touch with reality and it's from Facebook. A company well known to try to force their world view onto all other people around the world, ignoring any ethical questions arising. Sure by renaming themself they will manage to somewhat run away from their responsibilities, but as they don't really change their ways it's just a mater of time until we will have the next batch of scandals, now attached to the "meta"-name instead of Facebook.

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

#265

Post by woodruffw »

gfodor wrote: post #246
woodruffw wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Sure, I can understand the vision. I guess the more salient "why?" question is the one that still feels lacking to me. Current easy money aside, it's not clear why society as a whole would be willing to cast aside the last 250 years of physical ownership and financial infrastructure in exchange for digital ownership(?) and immutable ledgers with irrecoverable error conditions.

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

#266

Post by brundolf »

polote wrote: post #126
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…

The only thing that counts when you create a B2C product is how much time each user will spend time on your product per day. There is no goal to achieve for the user. Zuck is a very smart guy and knows that Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, Tiktok, Twitter, Youtube ... are activities for people. And those activities will keep being popular only a handful of years. If you don't want the Meta Inc, company's revenue to col…

> There is no goal to achieve for the user

I mean... there won't be users at all if there's nothing in it for the user.

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

#267

Post by gfodor »

dathinab wrote: post #263
gfodor wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

The ting is the "felling together" part is less dependent on the medium (real workd, audio, video, VR) but on the way the meeting is held. Video conferencing didn't fail because video conferencing is fundamentally bad but because: - meetings are often done in a fundamental bad way, where people don't have any "felling together" even is they sit physically in the same room. - people having bad microphones, the video p…

I wrote “feeling together in unmediated communication” on purpose. The unmediated part is the most important part of the definition.

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

#268

Post by nowherebeen »

manquer wrote: post #154
nowherebeen wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> FB 1.0 or apple under jobs Two very different companies and scenarios. Jobs as famous for cutting down >10 products product offerings down to 1-2 to refocus the company. His skillset was very much product strategy. He used money mostly for marketing and design. Two things Apple is very much well known for. Facebook is known for copy, acquire, kill. They offer tons of money to try to acquire competitors. If they say…

Control doesn't make it his money. His money is only small fraction of the money being spent. You made two statements that he is spending his money and spending money makes it not an achievement if it successful. Neither of it is true , bootstrapping your way to success may make it even more impressive achievement, but success with or without money is difficult achievement that shouldn't be belittled.

> he is spending his money

Say I have >50% control:

Can I make it a dynastic company and ensuring my kids gain control of the company? Yes.

Who can stop me? No one.

Can I dilute everyone else's shares and issues dividends when I want? Yes.

Can I issue dividends only to a certain class of shares ensuring those shares which I own a super majority get paid? Yes.

Can I fire the board when I want? Yes.

I mean sure. Its not his money, but its his company. Through and through.

> His money is only small fraction of the money being spent.

Company assets is not equity. I am not sure you fully understand how equity works.

> spending money makes it not an achievement if it successful.

No. Depends on how you spend it. Again, read my last comment.

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

#269

Post by littlestymaar »

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 see this conflation happening all the time from metaverse enthusiasts, but the metaverse != VR.

Would a high quality VR version of Zoom/Teams be awesome? Of course it would, it would be freaking amazing! But the “metaverse” ain't that, it's supposed to be a virtual universe (hence the name), where everything happens, including games, watching movies, etc. A gigantic MMORPG, containing every possible kind of online interaction and games. And this part is complete bullshit.

Which user story seems the most likely:

- the user open the app, select their contact or group, puts the VR headset on, join the chat room.

- the user puts the VR headset on, login in in “virtual flat”, go out, jump in his virtual (flying, as a DLC) car, and go to a virtual bar where your friends are waiting.

Only the second one is worth the “metaverse” name (the first one being just a “virtual chat over the internet”®), and even if it could be really fun in the beginning, and could even have a decent success as an MMO, it won't be the mainsteam way of communication.

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

#270

Post by Jasper_ »

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.

> To be fair, after motion pictures was initially invented, audiences are legitimately frightened by things that were happening on-screen.

For what it's worth, there's no record of that ever happening. There's been no account of this sort of thing, even in newspapers of the era, which at the time tended to exaggerate spectacles with catchy headlines, nor are there any police reports describing panic. As far as we know, people enjoyed the film and sat and watched it just fine.

https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/did-a-silent-film-abou...

Post reply on HN