The metaverse is already here, it's called the internet • Hacker News Board

Re: The metaverse is already here, it's called the internet

#61

Post by netcan » Sat, Oct 30, 2021, 11:20 AM UTC

Zuck is a pretty uninspiring orator, with a tendency to use flat metaphors and bland platitudes. He's also not much of a creative visionary. His version of what "metaverse" will be has Jetsons sort of logic. You get up, have some virtual toast and commute in a virtual car to a virtual office, then go home and feed your virtual pet. ... I'm exaggerating, but you get my meaning. JC, is, in contrast, quite inspiring.

Anyway, Zuck's easy to make fun of. Easy to underestimate too.

Back in the 90s, it was thought to have been proven that an AOL-like attempt to top-down control the WWW was doomed to failure. An open web was too powerful. Well... that was before Zuck.

In many countries, FB-only internet is free and that means FB-only internet is the internet for like a billion people. Meanwhile, lots of unsophisticated users who's first and only device is a smartphone are mostly just FB users. He defied conventional wisdom, made FB a walled garden. Zuck really did "do AOL."

Meanwhile, the IG & WA acquisitions are strategically flawless in retrospect. With his tactical skills in the early days, Zuck's managed to keep more shares and control over FB than other CEOs. He may not have style and he's not quite hip, but Zuck is effective in his strategies.

I'd like to believe Carmack is right and Zucks' lame, top-down VR metaverse is doomed... pun intended. But I also recall that Zuck bought John out, and he's the boss. That may not be coincidence.

Re: The metaverse is already here, it's called the internet

#62

Post by playpause » Sat, Oct 30, 2021, 11:22 AM UTC

j245 wrote: post #12

taylorportman wrote: post #6

How do we describe the "meta" phenomnom anymore, we need a new word for "meta" and I've been struggling but can't figure it out. What replaces the word "meta" if someone takes it, "gist"!?

Interesting question - What replaced the word Apple ?

That’s different. “Apple” is a very common everyday word, plus it’s arbitrary as a tech company name so the two are never confused in any reasonable context. “Meta” is a niche but useful word used in intellectual discussions, and Meta’s usage of it is relevant to its meaning. This means “meta” is far more under threat from Meta than “apple” was from Apple, because whenever someone describes something as “meta” in an ambiguous context (where they might be referring to the company or the concept), there will be a need for a little flow-interrupting clarification, and then people will just learn to use the word less (and thus the concept), because inconvenience is inconvenient.

It’s easy to dismiss concerns like this with “well another word will just appear in its place” but linguistic history will disagree with you. Sometimes we just lose things, and it’s sad.

Re: The metaverse is already here, it's called the internet

#63

Post by TheColorYellow » Sat, Oct 30, 2021, 11:25 AM UTC

Something sorely missing from the conversation is the infrastructure piece of all of this. It's much sexier to talk about VR experiences or whatever digital activity resonates with you, but none of this works without the infrastructure to connect, share, and engage across individual experiences.

I was (and reluctantly remain) so excited for cryptocurrency and blockchain networks because of this aspect. Broad open networks interoperable at a data level seemed like exactly what is needed to create more dynamic interconnected digital systems. To some extent this is what is happening in the background.

But the obsession with individual experiences, in crypto it is thr scam coins or ridiculous yield products, dominates the conversation. I think this has greatly derailed the other conversations.

Now I worry that we're left with the only other reasonable answer. Facebook builds this infrastructure as their platform and the market ignores all the problems and flocks to it.

Doesn't seem like there are many entities in between these two places that are working on a more robust, and healthy, "metaverse".

Re: The metaverse is already here, it's called the internet

#64

Post by TheColorYellow » Sat, Oct 30, 2021, 11:27 AM UTC

hooby wrote: post #51

I think what is sorely missing from the entire debate, is a clear definition of what a metaverse actually is. This article here seems to believe that the metaverse is nothing but "internet VR". The talk by Carmack for the most part equates the metaverse with MMVR - massively multiuser virtual reality. But according to the explanation that Raph Koster (the mind behing metaplace - the only prior attempt at ever buildin…

Let's just call it the digital ecosystem and leave it at that.

Re: The metaverse is already here, it's called the internet

#65

Post by lifeisstillgood » Sat, Oct 30, 2021, 11:31 AM UTC

I'm on the side of "this is a new interesting platform and worth exploring"

I am determined to try and set up a coding environment in one. I get the feeling it will transform the "laptop experience".

But hours drooling in the corner. No. My son spends waaay too much time online gaming, it does so alsost exclusively with a roster of friends - chatting laughing organising new lands or strategies.

It's not my grandfathers way to socialise. But it is socialising. And we parents occasionally use the internet to co-ordinate chucking them into the outdoors to basically talk about the game they would be playing if their parents weren't so awful :-)

I am beginning to think of parenting in the web age as managing in the remote working era. You cannot rely on just being in same room / house as kids as some metric - we need to decide what are the activities we want to see, what are the outcomes (hours spent laughing, maths problems solved, time spent bullshitting with friends)

Re: The metaverse is already here, it's called the internet

#66

Post by TheColorYellow » Sat, Oct 30, 2021, 11:32 AM UTC

meheleventyone wrote: post #15

PaulKeeble wrote: post #9

All we really need to collectively build up a metaverse is the HTML of VR, where experiences can be linked together. Web browsers can already launch 3D experiences in VR its just clunky and I switch it off because ads on some sites start VR for some reason. We already have quite a few 2D into VR desktops too and they work. Seamless transition and placement appears to be a bit lacking but it doesn't feel all that far…

I think there’s prior questions of what does interoperability actually add and why doesn’t it already exist? For example with the web the interoperability is really between the browser and websites rather than between websites. Although a few do interoperate. This is more similar to how Roblox or Steam works where one program lets you join lots of different games and maintains some common state than common ideas of i…

Interesting question, but doesn't a "metaverse" require interoperable applications to some extent?

I think the Zuck use case was buying a t-shirt for a virtual avatar and I want to use that t-shirt in other applications. There is a matter of interoperability required at the level of the data that sits behind both applications as it pertains to the user that sits on the other side of those applications. (meaning just sharing data isn't enough, there is user level context as well).

And if you reduce interoperability to a single entity owned platform (like Steam), well other platforms will exist and the interoperability problem will be recreated.

Re: The metaverse is already here, it's called the internet

#67

Post by ryanmercer » Sat, Oct 30, 2021, 11:32 AM UTC

throwawaycuriou wrote: post #57

ryanmercer wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

VR has been a bust because decent VR requires a heavy thing attached to your head, basically an empty room in your house, and a computer that (at least pre-covid auto prices) cost more than many of the cars on the road in the United States. My friend has had a vive for years, he has an entire room dedicated to it so you can actually walk around. Its being driven by a several thousand dollar computer and makes the roo…

VR Optician now accepts an ASX for astigmatism correction. I don't think it adds to the base $69 USD cost. Prism corrections for $50 more.

That's definitely better pricing than I found last time I looked, my lenses end up being $163. My left sphere adds $7 and both cylinders add $19 each + $49 for the prism.

Re: The metaverse is already here, it's called the internet

#68

Post by chaosite » Sat, Oct 30, 2021, 11:33 AM UTC

rvz wrote: post #35

chaosite wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Smartwatches aren't new in the same way smartglasses will be new. Watches weren't new, calculator watches were introduced almost half a century ago, the concept had a ton of time to mature. A HUD/AR capable smartglasses will be an entirely new concept that has so far failed spectacularly every time it has been tried. Not saying it won't happen, just that it'll need a lot more time to mature as a consumer product than…

My whole point is about execution, rather than something being 'new'. It's not about being first or introducing something 'entirely' new, it's about the overall execution of the concept which then leads to mass adoption and who ever does that properly with a 'killer app' and ecosystem behind it, wins. Can you tell me who currently leads in the smartwatches market?

AFAIK, the statistics still show Apple is in the lead, followed by Samsung and Huawei.

In my personal bubble, Garmin smart/fitness watches are the most popular, followed by Xiaomi Mi Bands. I use a Suunto smartwatch I got as a gift.

Re: The metaverse is already here, it's called the internet

#69

Post by lm28469 » Sat, Oct 30, 2021, 11:36 AM UTC

Arisaka1 wrote: post #29

q4Zar wrote: post #10

I'm a software developer and i pass literraly 80% of my time working to make my family survive to this world, and honestly the only thing that i have in mind it's to flippin go in the forest for a walk, i don't understand the thing of wanting so much to be isolated and wear a fucking VR mask, this world is fucked up !

Remarks like these remind me of something John Carmack said in Joe Rogan's interview: >“There’s this piece of art that goes around the internet of this dystopian kid in a corner, drooling, with goggles on with rainbow pictures and it’s a terrible looking place,” Carmack told Rogan. “And people say, ‘This is the world you’re trying to build, people plugged into virtual reality and ignoring the world around them.’” >“I…

> We change the world around us in all that we do. We live in air-conditioning.

And we see that it clearly has a very negative impact overall so idk what kind of argument is that.

"everything sucked so we destroyed our environment and enslaved ourselves to machines to make it bearable"

Re: The metaverse is already here, it's called the internet

#70

Post by scotty79 » Sat, Oct 30, 2021, 11:36 AM UTC

novalis78 wrote: post #48

We should talk more about that ‘crappy life’ outside the virtual world. China reduces kids computer gaming sessions and invests in actually improving living conditions. Facebook’s ad sponsored empire turns productive members of society into zombies amidst a crumbling infrastructure. There surely is room for VR and AR in improving aspects of life but Mark’s vision has a taste of dystopia.

The only thing China can reduce is online gaming. A reduction that will cause the kids to have less opportunity to connect with others, make friends, learn to cooperate, learn to trust people, learn to protect their identity and learn what to do when the trust is betrayed.

You know, the things that might come in handy in 20 years in toppling oppressive regime.

Meanwhile taking Chinese kids out of global shared culture that is increasingly more interconnected, virtual and gaming related so they only trust and feel at home when they are fed familiar government messaging.

But I'm sure goal of Chinese government is strictly improvement of peoples conditions.