201–210 of 391 posts
Let us see about the rumors that Apple will launch Apple glasses this fall. If I wanted AR I much rather have it from Tim Cook than Zuckerberg, and Apple knows how to build hardware. Zuckerberg does not.
The Oculus Quest 2 is really solid hardware, especially considering its low price.
Looking forward to logging in once and drawing as many dicks as possible in zucks metaverse before I'm banned.
This sort of disruption will probably be considered virtual terrorism one day... Imagine the CIA torturing some poor soul over dicks in the zuckerverse.
I'm surprised how negative the comments here are, even if it is true that 'metaverse' is turning into a pretty silly buzzword. I think there's still coherent concepts defined by it (interfaces becoming much more inline with what humans find natural, integration of VR+AR capabilities, and the 'Internet' becoming more and more 'real life' in general). Facebook is absolutely one of the best-positioned companies to be ab…
I agree, and I'm sure it may even end up as a great/fun experience, but I'm just concerned about what's likely to come along with it. There was a recent article linked on HN titled "even if you're paying, you're still the product", and that's pretty much how I see this going.
Facebook lost all good will years ago. It's not about the product quality, but the monetization strategies and what those entail.
> probably going to resemble some kind of a hybrid between the social platforms that we see today, but an environment where you’re embodied in it Opensimulator (the open source version of second life server) already exists, it is decentralized, self-hosted, and a few thousands of people re already living in it : https://opensimworld.com/
Serious question regarding my flagged comment in this thread since I'm new here: What's wrong with it? Is it not ok to express that I feel a phenomenon is sad? Did I need to go into more detail about how the phenomenon arose? Is criticism of capitalism or our societal systems unacceptable?
What does "sad" mean in this context?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I'm surprised how negative the comments here are Honest discussion about Facebook on tech-centric forums is nearly impossible these days. Facebook and Zuckerberg are favorite villains in the tech discourse in 2021. I don't agree with everything Facebook has done, but the vitriol directed at Facebook has become so disconnected from reality that it's getting hard to take it seriously. > this still does seem like a ve…
Every community needs a villain, but ask yourself this: whatever happened to Libra? Portal? (Or Building 8 in general.) Did you know that Facebook built its own drone (Aquila) that it abandoned in 2018? M? Facebook Home? Parse? Wirehog? As seen with Google, just having excellent engineers and revenue are insufficient to building lasting products, much less fulfilling an aggressive long-term mission.
Agree with your point - to a limit. Some of facebook experiements flopped but not all. Also, unlike Google, fb mostly marketed them as experiements.
Replying mostly for sharing purposes since not all of these products' histories are common knowledge. Not to one-up anyone...
> Libra Government Blocking. Seemed interesting, especially in a crypto world. Unclear if world needs more crypto projects. Some economists suggested the "basket of currency" approach at scale would just be an arbitrage opportunity for someone to drain the bank-of-facebook. I'm guessing this project existed partially as a vanity project or honeypot for hiring.
> Portal? Still sold, still developed (uses alexa and amzn develops alexa-for-portal work still), still used. IMO it was good tech no one trusted (understandably).
> Or Building 8 in general IIRC they have build a few internal products for fb and probably a lot of learning that goes into oculus/portal/etc.
> M I think this was never GA and only a test trial? Would've been cool but again, because fb it couldn't be trusted.
> Parse? Open sourced and available, but obviously mostly unused. FB doesn't really have a b2b sales team for this sort of product so it wasn't sustainable since it was not really invest-more-effort quality. I think it was a huge missed opportunity for fb to enter the data center race against aws/gcs/azure. If fb built a benign cash cow, maybe they'd taper down their scummy social network ambitions. Or at least the value extraction. AWS cash seems to fund cool amzn loss leaders (alexa, etc). I think the same thing applies to wit.ai and other AI products they buy - if they could commercialize them into an "AWS for AI" product suite maybe they'd find a new profit center. They have world class ML work already, so seems a good place to do this.
> Wirehog I never heard of this one so i googled it [1]. Apparently it was a legal risk to continue at the time (ha!). Very similar to napster. Makes sense that a startup business ([1] https://techcrunch.com/2010/05/26/wirehog/
I'm surprised how negative the comments here are, even if it is true that 'metaverse' is turning into a pretty silly buzzword. I think there's still coherent concepts defined by it (interfaces becoming much more inline with what humans find natural, integration of VR+AR capabilities, and the 'Internet' becoming more and more 'real life' in general). Facebook is absolutely one of the best-positioned companies to be ab…
>Facebook is absolutely one of the best-positioned companies to be able to become a long-term market leader in these areas
I think the reason for the negativity is possibly because maybe a company that's managed to create a massive platform where reality is massively distorted and manipulated algorithmically to maximize ad revenue and engangement, whatever the quality or lack thereof, should not be a leader in trying to make the internet 'real life' or whatever you want to call having ar/vr avatars that will allow you to participate in the new virtual corporate consumer world.
I'm surprised how negative the comments here are, even if it is true that 'metaverse' is turning into a pretty silly buzzword. I think there's still coherent concepts defined by it (interfaces becoming much more inline with what humans find natural, integration of VR+AR capabilities, and the 'Internet' becoming more and more 'real life' in general). Facebook is absolutely one of the best-positioned companies to be ab…
> I'm surprised how negative the comments here are Honest discussion about Facebook on tech-centric forums is nearly impossible these days. Facebook and Zuckerberg are favorite villains in the tech discourse in 2021. I don't agree with everything Facebook has done, but the vitriol directed at Facebook has become so disconnected from reality that it's getting hard to take it seriously. > this still does seem like a ve…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Their Quest headsets still work fine with Steam… for now
I got a quest 1 for as a gift a couple years back. They frequently automatically installed updates that break mods. Now, my headset is currently bricked and I need to figure out how to factory reset or something to fix it. Maybe its just indifference, but given facebook's history it feels intentional.
Facebook has so far tried, and failed, to do this. Twice. First was Facebook Spaces. Opened 2017, closed 2019. This was a VR world. Not a very good one. It was mostly a 3D approach to a desktop.[1] You could hand other people flat pictures. Sharing! Total flop. Second was Facebook Horizon. Opened 2020, still running, but not getting much attention. It's a 3D cartoon level VR world. Works OK, not very interesting or p…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Instagram has already peaked and is on the down-trend. TikTok is what the kids are using now - and they're valued at about half of what FB is valued at, so unlikely that FB will be able to buy them. Maybe FB will buy whatever replaces TikTok.
>Maybe FB will buy whatever replaces TikTok. It's unlikely that the government would permit such a sale.