Live data from Hacker News

The metaverse is bullshit

outline.com

611–620 of 780 posts

Re: The metaverse is bullshit

#611
I wouldn’t conflate the excitement for VR/AR with crypto.

To me, the metaverse is a web browser for VR. But rather than a flat screen with text and images, it’s a 3D environment where open objects can coexist.

Kids today play Minecraft or Roblox etc for hours while simultaneously watching a twitch or youtube stream with their friends and video or text chatting about it. Sometimes they just have an open vid connection just for the “pseudo connectedness” of having someone feel next to you while doing something independently. All of this bodes well for more integrated experiences.

We need - as with the early web- for engineers to push this stuff to be open. Because it won’t really take off until it’s open, we are currently in the “AOL” vs “compuserve” phase.

Re: The metaverse is bullshit

#612
post #29
post #9

> "The metaverse is bullshit because it already exists, and it's called the internet > Being 'inside' a virtual world was never really the important part" Well, the facebook keynote presents a compelling argument how social interaction with VR can be more meaningful than through a 2D screen in many situations. However, what IS bullshit, is the display of obviously fake demonstrations with highly experimental and expe…

Zuckerberg sees that anime fans and furries love spending time on VRchat and he wants to build it out for fans of football and the Kardashians. People that buy Louis Vuitton are going to shell out for NFT metaverse skins and wear dorky headsets. That totally tracks.

Well, normie kids did glom onto Fortnite en masse, and then started bullying each other over their Fortnite avatars' equipment...

Re: The metaverse is bullshit

#613

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>If you wanted a 1:1 with actual reality then you wouldn’t need Virtual Reality in the first place. What? Why? A 1:1 with reality that is cheap and convenient enough to be an equivalent to modern smartphones would be an honest to god revolution. Imagine face-to-face social media where a group of 20 strangers from all over the world and across 13 different socio-culutral groups are sitting down drinking virtual beer (…

That sounds incoherent. Why are we all drinking OJ/beer? Can we taste it? If so, I can't mention how this beer tastes to my random group of 20 worldwide strangers (that all understand English and American culture enough for me to gossip about US celebrities apparently?) without risking giving up the lie? Real Life In My Pocket? I already have Real Life Outside Of My Pocket, too. It's not a utopia yet, I don't see why…

>That sounds incoherent.

Why so? the first 3 paragraphs are 2 examples of why a 1:1 reconstruction of our world on demand can be an amazing thing, the remaining is the statment 'All creation or innovation that the human brain does, or is ever capable off, is simply mixing and remixing its readings of the outside world. So mutable and cheap on-demand reconstructions of the outside world will be an immense boost to creativity and innovation'

>Why are we all drinking OJ/beer?

Why are we exchanging asynchronous plaintext blocks right now instead of speaking on the phone or sharing 30-seconds videos on tiktok? This is the medium we chose, this is the medium the hypothetical group in my example chose. (from a sea of possibilities that make our communication options right now look like ancient letters)

>Can we taste it?

If the hypothetical social media app we're talking about is any good, it will have the option to sync your avatar to real-life-you on various 'motion paths', so that whenever you move along those motion paths, your avatar move in the same way. One of those 'motion paths' is all the movements your hand make when holding an actual drink, which would translate to your avatar mirroring the movement in the meta verse.

What happens if you release the drink ? you have the option of making the renderer either disappearing it or (for fidelity) putting it in a corresponding location in the dream. What happens if you can't or don't want to drink? you have the option to either make the renderer hallucinate a drink (along with believable drinking animations at believable intervals) or just make you appear in the dream as you are in meat space.

What happens if/when the marriage of neuroscience and computers get fruitful enough that this whole thing is being served directly to your neurons, bypassing the many middle men in your eyes, ears and skin? You can have the additional option of eschewing physical mirroring of the meta verse and just have the gear directly stimulate the feeling of drinking whenever you drink in the metaverse.

>If so, I can't mention how this beer tastes to my random group of 20 worldwide strangers [...] without risking giving up the lie?

Lie? Am I lying to you right now because my username is not the full name registered to my national number in my country's official records ? is the jvm lying to the code running inside of it by presenting virtual method calls as a hardware primitive? This is make-believe, the whole entirety of human civilization is built on it. Even my real name is no more real than the username I chose for this account, except merely by the virtue that more of my existence (more records, more of my opinions, more memories in more heads,...) is attached to it.

You have the option to say you're presenting as yourself-in-the-real, you have the option of pretending to present as yourself-in-the-real, you have the option of not doing that and saying to your group you're just making the renderer playing tricks on them, and on and on it goes. Whole ecosystems and apps will develop conventions and preferences toward particular options.

>that all understand English and American

This is entirely orthogonal to the technology under discussion, the internet have made millions want to understand English so they can communicate with a greater pool of people, and when cyber communication becomes as deep and convincing as the vision of the metaverse, untold millions more will be motivated to understand popular languages, and will be able to more efficiently than now because language learning (as all learning) will become much more effective and joyful, imagine the high-fidelity virtual/recorded tourism trips available by the petabytes to every person who wants them.

Again, when/If AI or neuro+cyber ever reach the moon they are aiming for, this will integrate nicely with the vision of the meta verse by, respectively, a real-time translation engine running in parallel or direct brain-to-brain telepathy, but even without this the metaverse faces a problem of languages that is no easier and no harder than the internet, which I see it handles perfectly fine.

>(that all understand English and American culture enough for me to gossip about US celebrities apparently?)

I didn't specify English or American exactly, I myself am a Middle Easterner with worse-than-average [knowledge of | interest in] all but the most popular celebrities even in my own country. International or regional celebrities have worldwide following even now and even by purely traditional media, and the internet have made the word 'celebrity' expand in very weird directions.

>Real Life In My Pocket? I already have Real Life Outside Of My Pocket

"Electronic computers, why!, I already have pen, paper and my trusty slide rule right here my good sir. I see no purpose those 'electronic brains' of yours can serve"

>It's not a utopia yet, I don't see why putting it in my pocket would magically make it so.

Nobody ever said it would, it's a very specific vision* with a very specific claims : We will construct our own sensory reality. Whatever can be fixed or made (much much) better by constructing and manipulating indistinguishable-from-the-real-thing sensory models of reality, this vision is implicitly claiming it would fix or make it better. This is a gargantuan subset of. humanity's problems. Whatever can't be fixed by this alone, won't, and nobody ever claimed otherwise.

* :When I say 'vision', I mean the actual vision advanced by visionaries like Greg Egan, Gibson, and others in their works, not the garbage copied-and-pasted from the marketing brochures of corporations jumping on the trend, or for that matter those marketing brochures themselves, which are a watered-down inferior version of the visionaries' vision. I'm just as opposed and unbelieving of the promises those companies make as anyone who ever read a headline or two about them, I just still believe in the underlying dreams they are appropriating/butchering.

Re: The metaverse is bullshit

#614
I agree basically with the article entirely.

People in this thread seem to be focusing on VR and AR and immersive interaction and they're missing the point. The article is not a rebuke on these things, lots of people would love to jack into quake and run around like real life, or engage in some virtual activity while their nether regions tingle. What's being rebuked is this idea that people will walk down a street from one website to another and sit around a fake room drinking a beer with their buddies with dildos strapped to their foreheads and hundred gallon cowboy hats on. This idea that all online interaction is better when immersive is absurd if you think about it. VR games are cool, but the metaverse isn't VR games, it's VR YouTube ads and VR SMS and it's not going to catch on because it's lame.

Re: The metaverse is bullshit

#615
Not so sure it's bullshit. Why live in the real world if you can somehow live in an online 3D world that's better? It's going to happen eventually and everyone will be wearing goggles all day, just like they are on their phones all day now. Whoever controls that online world (worlds?) will make a lot of money.

Re: The metaverse is bullshit

#616
post #482
post #472

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I will use VR when I can put on my headset, anywhere, and be transported to my "desk". I want to be able to take documents and move them around in VR, read them, put them on my "table", and then have apps that appear as monitors. So I can move and pull up email in front of me, "grab" an attachment, and "put" it into another email that I will compose. And have emails look like a stack of papers that you could actually…

Lastly! You only need 1 device. So spending $5k+ on a device that could provide a better experience than your TV, iPad, laptop, desktop, monitors, headphones, and everything else would be reasonable. The way we interact with tech today is a semi-distracted state. There is always some sort of "real world" going on, and we're not immersed. It would take more energy to be fully immersed, but we would be more productive…

In the case of watching TV with another person, the being in the same room together is often the point. Sharing a virtual space makes less sense when you have this option. The form factor of an iPad makes it portable in a way today’s headsets are not, and I can access a desktop computer remotely if I am away on travel. I agree with you about immersion but it’s hard for me to see headsets as anything but another device.

Re: The metaverse is bullshit

#617
post #577

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Text is mightier than the Metaverse. "A Picture says more than a thousand words." > Kids can do video calls with their smartphones but prefer texting. Because text is asynchronous, and persistent. Text is a weak medium, but with specific strengths which can beat others in certain situation if they can played well. > We could discuss Hacker News stories with video chat but we prefer text. I guess you haven't discove…

I'm waiting for the day I can Ctrl-F on a Youtube video, say a key phrase, then the video jumps to the point where someone says the key phrase (or the video is about the key phrase). Meanwhile, text is so much more easily consumable. (Youtube Premium junkie here, BTW.)

Sometimes when I search for an exercise on google, it will link me to a segment of a video with the appropriate exercise. So I guess google is on this.

Re: The metaverse is bullshit

#618

I think the only BS is the way we.all talk about this stuff, same way the cloud is all hyped up. AR and VR are great tech, when it gets good enough that it's a simple comfortable accessory to wear, and it incurs no strain on your eyes, it'll definitely find many uses. And for sure we'll pursue the tech for better full body tracking, walking in-place, simulated touch, and all that, and if all that one day works simila…

> It can even be simple things, if I can now whiteboard virtually, and use my own hand writing on the board, and now I'm in another app, and I'd like to pull up that whiteboard I did? This is equivalent to say Slack letting you send photos or files over.

Except that it is not at all equivalent. To pull your whiteboard the other app has to pull the code that draws and manipulates it. This has two problems a) security b) how the host app supposed to interact with yours?

OLE and a few similar technologies tried to answer this. Never seen big use due to complexity. Since that time no new ideas emerged in the field and I don’t see how Metaverse would solve this. Without addressing interoperability and security Metawerse apps will be siloed in the same way as modern apps. That would impose non-physical constraints in the world that tries to by as close to physical reality as possible. I see this as a major concern.

Re: The metaverse is bullshit

#619

Text is mightier than the Metaverse. Kids can do video calls with their smartphones but prefer texting. We could discuss Hacker News stories with video chat but we prefer text. News and politics junkies prefer reading text tweets on Twitter to watching talking news anchors. Once upon a time Amazon was a company that only sold books. Dried ink on dead trees. And in the early internet age this book seller outperformed…

> Text is mightier than the Metaverse. "A Picture says more than a thousand words." > Kids can do video calls with their smartphones but prefer texting. Because text is asynchronous, and persistent. Text is a weak medium, but with specific strengths which can beat others in certain situation if they can played well. > We could discuss Hacker News stories with video chat but we prefer text. I guess you haven't discove…

>>Because text is asynchronous, and persistent. Text is a weak medium, but with specific strengths which can beat others in certain situation if they can played well.

It is indeed async & persistent, but those are not it's only strengths.

Text is ALSO highly searchable, and skim-able. I can search and jump right to the point I want, I can rapidly skim through parts I'm not so interested in and then focus and examine deeply and repeatedly the part that is of interest. Or, I can read it sequentially like a video/audio stream. In contrast, searching vid/audio is cumbersome, frustrating, and time-wasting at best.

Text is ALSO has a much higher information density than video, except for situations where moving pictures actually add to the information, as in video of a specifi event, mechanism working, etc. Most of the time, just listening to a talking head is far slower, and harder to remember than reading (where I can read rapidly forward, then back and re-read key bits, often without even thinking about it; w/ video, I'd need to interrupt the train of thought, hit [back], try to go back just the right number of seconds, then re-view, etc. - useful ONLY when the vid id of an event, not of just reading info.)

Moreover, text is more direct. To make a really good video usually requires a well-thought out script written in advance, from which one reads - I'd rather just read the script. And when it is something like an interview with a noted expert, I'd usually rather just read the transcript, for the above reasons.

You actually highlight the problem with video: >>There will be a high chance of 90% of the content just being halfassed trash.

Absolutely correct - most of it will be rushed out without the solid base of a test-based script and screenplay, which would in most cases be preferable...

Text really is —still— one of the key defining inventions of humanity, and I have no expectations that a "metaverse" will beat it soon. (Now if it can start reading text directly out of my brain without typing/dictating, and I can edit it on the fly — THAT will be really something...)

Re: The metaverse is bullshit

#620

Text is mightier than the Metaverse. Kids can do video calls with their smartphones but prefer texting. We could discuss Hacker News stories with video chat but we prefer text. News and politics junkies prefer reading text tweets on Twitter to watching talking news anchors. Once upon a time Amazon was a company that only sold books. Dried ink on dead trees. And in the early internet age this book seller outperformed…

> Text is mightier than the Metaverse. "A Picture says more than a thousand words." > Kids can do video calls with their smartphones but prefer texting. Because text is asynchronous, and persistent. Text is a weak medium, but with specific strengths which can beat others in certain situation if they can played well. > We could discuss Hacker News stories with video chat but we prefer text. I guess you haven't discove…

> Text is a weak medium

You state this as fact while it's extremely debatable. What is your measure of a mediums strength?

Post reply on HN