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

Sheryl Sandberg stepping down as Facebook COO

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 619 posts

Re: Sheryl Sandberg stepping down as Facebook COO

#351

Post by zmmmmm »

h2odragon wrote: post #149
echelon wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You need to check out "Metaverse Twitter". You're missing out on a lot of fascinating developments. The field is in its "90's internet phase" right now. The tech is still immature, but is rapidly growing in capability and ambition. Just like most people in the 90's had no idea how "internet" would be used, I think our ability to conceive of VR/AR/XR/metaverse is similarly myopic. I would give it a 10-15 year timeline…

VR hype predates the wider adoption of the internet. It's been in this "90s VR phase" since the 90s .

sure but the ground has shifted dramatically, in large part due to Meta because of standalone devices. You can't overlook that and pretend the tech is still 90's era.

Re: Sheryl Sandberg stepping down as Facebook COO

#352

Post by colinmhayes »

thewebcount wrote: post #300
elorant wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The difference is that you play with your whole body, not just your fingers. You can duck for cover, or run, or kick and punch someone, or construct an item with your hands. It’s immersive and it could take gaming to a whole other level. This is what AR and games are all about. Not necessarily what Meta wants to build.

How's that going to work in my living room where there's an ottoman, a coffee table, the dog's running around, etc. Or do I need to build a new room just for AR/VR stuff? I mean, yeah you can do some interesting stuff like having virtual Jenga on your coffee table, or whatever, but thinking in terms of HalfLife 4, or even sitting around chatting with 3 other friends who are in different locations, it sounds like it w…

> Or do I need to build a new room just for AR/VR stuff?

Probably, at least until we perfect the matrix or 360 degree treadmill tech.

Re: Sheryl Sandberg stepping down as Facebook COO

#353

Post by SilverBirch »

samwillis wrote: post #42

I wander what this means for Nick Clegg, and how much of his promotion to be “the same level” as Sheryl and Mark was related to her intention to leave. He obviously isn’t a COO, but then Facebook has an existential legislative risk. So maybe that’s the indication, they need to be co-run by a policy leader, and opps is a solved problem. https://amp.theguardian.com/technology/2022/feb/16/nick-cleg... > “[Mark] added th…

The strategy seems to be "if we put this potato in a suit no one can really get too mad, and if they do we'll just bake him".

Re: Sheryl Sandberg stepping down as Facebook COO

#354

Post by zmmmmm »

echelon wrote: post #119
hervature wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel compelled to say that your second sentence is probably the funniest thing I've ever read on HN. It resonates very strongly with my belief that VR/Metaverse will continue to under deliver. What people want is an escape from reality. "Just like" Ready Player One or anything from a wide choice of science fiction novels. The problem is that these systems require a fundamental disconnect from reality. Not only do w…

You need to check out "Metaverse Twitter". You're missing out on a lot of fascinating developments. The field is in its "90's internet phase" right now. The tech is still immature, but is rapidly growing in capability and ambition. Just like most people in the 90's had no idea how "internet" would be used, I think our ability to conceive of VR/AR/XR/metaverse is similarly myopic. I would give it a 10-15 year timeline…

I remember walking into a computer shop in the late 90's and saying I wanted to install Wifi in my house. They looked at me like I was an alien. One of them literally said "Why would you want that?"

It was probably less than 5 years before Wifi was ubiquitous.

Re: Sheryl Sandberg stepping down as Facebook COO

#355

Post by JKCalhoun »

lvl102 wrote: post #72

I think Sheryl is going out near the top here. She literally rode this generation of SV wave from the beginning. From a Larry Summers’ protege to one of the most influential executives on the planet. Despite all the negatives associated with Facebook, I think she was the best thing to happen to FB and Mark Zuckerberg.

> Despite all the negatives associated with Facebook, I think she was the best thing to happen to FB and Mark Zuckerberg.

Yeah, my impression has been that she has provided cover for FB and Mark Zuckerberg.

Re: Sheryl Sandberg stepping down as Facebook COO

#356

Post by rvz »

nickdothutton wrote: post #116
frisco wrote: post #25

I increasingly believe that Facebook’s pivot to Meta will end up going down as one of the biggest misses in the history of business. The metaverse is a real idea yes - but strapping a phone to your face and walking through your coffee table isn’t it. Especially not with a mediocre centralized FB owned “virtual world” where they inflict heavy taxes and content moderation. Facebook has neglected its core businesses for…

Augmented reality will beat virtual reality.

This.

That is the true reality of it all.

Re: Sheryl Sandberg stepping down as Facebook COO

#357

Post by oliwary »

hnthrowaway0328 wrote: post #271
oliwary wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As far as I can tell from the material Meta has released, they have an incredibly ambitious vision for the metaverse. Essentially, I believe they want to create glasses that you wear, that allow you to see other people in your space, wherever they are. So you could have a conversation with three friends in your living room, as if they were there, while they could be on different continents, making physical location i…

One thing I don't get is why there is a such high regard of visual input. I mean, we can speak to our friends since the telephone age, and we can see them on screen too since maybe the 90s. Is there a huge demand to actually see them IN THE SAME ROOM ? I really don't think so. But maybe future generations have different ideas. I think VR can make a lot of difference in training (e.g. medical training) but it's not co…

I don't know! I do know that I vastly prefer meeting people in person, compared to talking on the phone, and I think it is the same for a lot of people. I prefer it so much that I occasionally spend hundreds of dollars on airplane tickets to travel to see friends and family and attend meetings in person.

There is clearly something different in in-person interactions that makes me do this, and if Meta or someone else can replicate part of that experience I believe that could be very valuable. Think even of the environmental implications - so much energy is spend moving people around, imagine if AR platforms could reduce the number of trips by even a small percentage!

Re: Sheryl Sandberg stepping down as Facebook COO

#358

Post by luckydata »

haunter wrote: post #118
hervature wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel compelled to say that your second sentence is probably the funniest thing I've ever read on HN. It resonates very strongly with my belief that VR/Metaverse will continue to under deliver. What people want is an escape from reality. "Just like" Ready Player One or anything from a wide choice of science fiction novels. The problem is that these systems require a fundamental disconnect from reality. Not only do w…

>What people want is an escape from reality. I still don't understand what's the difference between MMOs and Metaverse. Like it's on mobile? That's all? Peak WoW _was_ a social network something Zuck is dreaming about (and that's while you also have to pay a monthly sub). I've read around and some people say that the difference people can _create content_ in Metaverse but... sandbox MMOs are also a thing for a long t…

nobody knows because it's not a real thing. It's one of those "there's something there and we need to be a part of it when it gets big" kind of things.

I don't believe that VR will ever become mainstream btw, but AR has huge applicability starting from business but also for people involved in all kinds of sports, especially anything to do with bikes / skis / motorcycles etc...

I strongly suspect Facebook will not be the winner of either use case.

Apple / Disney are much better positioned to capture the "virtual amusement park / mall" space than Meta.

Google / Microsoft are better positioned for the work / leisure time use case.

Conclusion: Meta is screwed.

Re: Sheryl Sandberg stepping down as Facebook COO

#359

Post by mmaunder »

frisco wrote: post #25

I increasingly believe that Facebook’s pivot to Meta will end up going down as one of the biggest misses in the history of business. The metaverse is a real idea yes - but strapping a phone to your face and walking through your coffee table isn’t it. Especially not with a mediocre centralized FB owned “virtual world” where they inflict heavy taxes and content moderation. Facebook has neglected its core businesses for…

Don’t confuse investor sobriety after an epic party with strategic miscalculation.

Zuck is taking a gamble. Good for him. It’s extremely rare for a big co to have the balls and for leadership to have the autonomy to do this these days. He has both.

He may fail. But at least he took a big hairy audacious risky shot at first to market and a chance at being what Steve Jobs is to smart phones.

I wouldn’t count him out just yet. What he’s doing with Oculus as a loss leader is interesting, and the tech is hitting an interesting inflection point as it becomes wireless, low latency and cheap for the first time.

Hate on FB and confirm your biases all you want, but watch this space.

Re: Sheryl Sandberg stepping down as Facebook COO

#360

Post by nostromo »

smt88 wrote: post #224
wly_cdgr wrote: post #213

My guess is she wants to succeed where Hillary failed and needs to distance herself from Zuck in preparation for 2028/2032, particularly after the effect the 2020 election and Jan 6 had on Zuck's and FB's public image

I would take the opposite side of this bet. I don't think she'll run for president. She has too many skeletons in her closet, especially related to protecting Bobby Kotick.

She seems squeaky clean compared to the Clintons, Trumps, and Bidens.
Post reply on HN