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

Facebook Renames to Meta

about.facebook.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

541–550 of 1001 posts

Re: Facebook Renames to Meta

#541

Post by jazzyjackson »

molsongolden wrote: post #479
Dumblydorr wrote: post #411

Can anyone here convince me AR/VR isn't a fad? If FB is headed towards a metaverse where our insane uncles can embed themselves further in a false reality, how is it that the rest of us sane individuals want to join their conspiratorial matrix? Even taking out the crazy uncles, VR makes me insanely nauseous. What's more, it's very expensive to get solid VR that doesn't, nevermind it still looks terrible even if you h…

More fluid collaborative remote work environments. I haven't kept up with or tried any of the AR/VR products but I could see huge usage if someone can nail the remote work VR experience. Assume there will be reasonably priced hardware with good performance when thinking about the space. This bit is inevitable if the demand exists.

It’s an accessibility lawsuit waiting to happen, as a large portion of the general population gets motion sickness wearing goggles.

AI audio descriptors may come in handy, but really I’m more concerned with excluding people based on cost of hardware and access to high speed internet.

(I’m designing a metaverse platform which supports multiple interaction modes so as not to exclude people, AMA)

Re: Facebook Renames to Meta

#542

Post by swalsh »

drcode wrote: post #372
deelowe wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hope they have serious plans for changing how VR works today. VR quickly loses it's appeal after a few hours. The isolation it brings with it is a huge issue. AR holds more promise in terms of mass appeal but I'm not sure we have that one quite figured out yet technically and from a UX perspective.

Yeah, I'm a VR nerd but I now find that wearing a VR helment for too long creates a kind of existential loneliness that will be hard to solve with better technology.

It really depends on the game. I was playing H3VR, and definatley experienced that dreadful isolation feeling as I was out in the middle of nowhere surrounded by fake unliving things. But in multiplayer games like Onward Its provided the opposite feeling for me. My wife and kids left for a week, and I work from home... after a few days, it felt like hanging out with friends.

Re: Facebook Renames to Meta

#543

Post by EpicEng »

7373737373 wrote: post #161
brap wrote: post #125

The video they put out is extremely cringe. The whole “metaverse” thing is cringe. It makes me believe Zuckerberg is completely surrounded by yes-men who never challenge him and only tell him what he likes to hear. He is truly detached from us normal people and our human experience.

I wish he'd just present as his awkward true self, instead of this prerecorded, fake cringefest, something Musk doesn't shy away from

Yeah but his "true self" isn't exactly something 99.99% of people enjoy. He's a robotic tool. Looks to me like he signed up for a "how to appear more human 101" course and now gesticulates with his hands non-stop.

Re: Facebook Renames to Meta

#544

Post by dropnerd »

daviding wrote: post #36

If there is going to be a metaverse, I'm not sure I want Facebook to own it. It's like a bad sci-fi pulp story. Given their investment and research, I wonder if they should open it all up (even if contradictory to short-term gains in ad revenue) so it has a chance to grow? Federate it a bit more than they are comfortable with, to at least give it a chance. I could see this flubbing out hard otherwise. I'm personally…

every hn top thread about fb says "we don't want fb to do this" or "fb is evil"

whether you agree or disagree, the more interesting question is the details behind what Meta could build

the answer is not federation. federation doesn't scale.

Re: Facebook Renames to Meta

#546

Post by carlosdp »

wpietri wrote: post #522
polote wrote: post #378

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It makes me believe Zuckerberg is completely surrounded by yes-men I feel like the opposite. Zuck is the only one to believe in the metaverse and as a result people who worked on the communication did it badly without a lot of conviction. He is in a pretty comfortable position, one of the richest people on earth doing 20% of growth every year. And still he wants to make a big risky bet like this one. I'm not really…

What things would those be? As far as I know his successes are a) 1 idea he had as a 19-year-old plus b) some other things that he bought with the money from that.

Say what you will about Mark, no informed person could claim with a straight face that he's not one of the savviest business-people in history.

Re: Facebook Renames to Meta

#547

Post by karaterobot »

This is your opportunity to get in on the ground floor of not using Meta. In retrospect, a lot of people wish they'd done this with Facebook, but of course it's too late now. Don't make any mistakes you know you'll regret.

Re: Facebook Renames to Meta

#548

Post by mritchie712 »

wpietri wrote: post #522
polote wrote: post #378

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It makes me believe Zuckerberg is completely surrounded by yes-men I feel like the opposite. Zuck is the only one to believe in the metaverse and as a result people who worked on the communication did it badly without a lot of conviction. He is in a pretty comfortable position, one of the richest people on earth doing 20% of growth every year. And still he wants to make a big risky bet like this one. I'm not really…

What things would those be? As far as I know his successes are a) 1 idea he had as a 19-year-old plus b) some other things that he bought with the money from that.

* 1 idea he stole as a 19-year-old

I'm not big on people complaining about "idea stealing", but zuck is in a league of his own with this shit, so worth pointing out that he didn't have the idea for FB.

Re: Facebook Renames to Meta

#549

Post by micromacrofoot »

astlouis44 wrote: post #277

Sorry Zuckerberg, but the metaverse will NOT be a walled garden, tied to a social media company. Is the the internet, and more specifically, THE WEB itself as an immersive, distributed spatial ecosystem of worlds. The metaverse needs to be interoperable above all else, and this is unachievable with the equivalent of native, vendor locked apps controlled by an entity. The web already does this, as every site is govern…

> the metaverse will NOT be a walled garden, tied to a social media company

> If you're interested in learning more or registering your intent ahead of our general availability launch, you can join our Discord here

This is award-worthy satire

Re: Facebook Renames to Meta

#550

Post by carbonguy »

throwawaycuriou wrote: post #413
uuddlrlr wrote: post #344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I don't think Facebook is constitutionally able to give up ad revenue gains This "fiduciary duty" meme really needs to die. Seriously the idea of fiduciary duty [to maximixe profit] is dystopian, corporations don't fuck us over because they have to they do it because they can. Edit: clarify

I also blinked at that. But then took it to mean constitutionally in a pure sense - whether they can keep a strength of belief enough to follow through. Unrelated to 'The Constitution' from a US citizen's point of view. Although now I'm pondering just how misplaced and powerful our reverence of that cobbled together document is.

You are correct, that is the sense that I meant it. I'll edit my comment to clarify.
Post reply on HN