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

Meta Myths

stratechery.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 210 posts

Re: Meta Myths

#121

Post by namelessoracle »

sofixa wrote: post #68
miketery wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The metaverse is not bombing. It’s simply not tied to one platform. Between TikTok, Roblox, Minecraft, call of duty (and other triple A multiplayer games), we’re already there. Meta can’t win this one. Same way that no single game publisher can dominate video games. Even the hardware, fine meta becomes the first “Nintendo”. So what? The PlayStations and Xbox’s will come. No one will let Meta have a monopoly.

> Between TikTok, Roblox, Minecraft, call of duty (and other triple A multiplayer games), we’re already there. How are those "metaverse"?

They are digital spaces that people now live a significant portion of their life in. (its what they do when they aren't working, or even when they are supposed to be working, most of their social interactions come from it, its a significant part of their identity)

Re: Meta Myths

#122

Post by namelessoracle »

jacobr1 wrote: post #111
r00fus wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Zuckerberg fancies Meta is "IOI" from Ready Player One. Let's leave alone the fact that the state of the art is simply not capable with our technology. What is the Minecraft/Roblox economy as opposed to the rest of the economy? Like .05%? Growth given the lack of actual capabilities is likely flatline. Metaverse was obviously a BS pivot. Question is what Zuckerberg is covering up before they pivot back.

Not IOI - he wants to be Gregarious Simulation Systems

But his company is IOI. At best he is hoping he creates enough groundswell that he can buy GSS if it comes about.

Re: Meta Myths

#123

Post by Kye »

hintymad wrote: post #44

The All-In Podcast had a chart ( https://youtu.be/A-bIpJdaCnM?t=2126 ) that compared the Meta's investment on VR with the investment that changed human history in the past, all inflation adjusted. It's pretty interesting. iPhone: $3.6B, Tesla: $25B, Boeing: $32B, Apollo: $253B. And Meta's Reality Lab: $4B a quarter !

What has Tesla changed? All it did was show a market for non-garbage electric cars. Other more established companies are running laps around it now. How much of that $25B went to the ever-retreating promises of self-driving?

Re: Meta Myths

#124

Post by baggy_trough »

Kye wrote: post #123
hintymad wrote: post #44

The All-In Podcast had a chart ( https://youtu.be/A-bIpJdaCnM?t=2126 ) that compared the Meta's investment on VR with the investment that changed human history in the past, all inflation adjusted. It's pretty interesting. iPhone: $3.6B, Tesla: $25B, Boeing: $32B, Apollo: $253B. And Meta's Reality Lab: $4B a quarter !

What has Tesla changed? All it did was show a market for non-garbage electric cars. Other more established companies are running laps around it now. How much of that $25B went to the ever-retreating promises of self-driving?

"All it did"

Re: Meta Myths

#125

Post by traverseda »

JeremyReimer wrote: post #91
sofixa wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Between TikTok, Roblox, Minecraft, call of duty (and other triple A multiplayer games), we’re already there. How are those "metaverse"?

The confusion and disconnect comes from the fact that the Metaverse, by definition, cannot ever exist. Zuckerberg is chasing a fantasy. I wrote in more detail about it here [1], but the basic gist is: 1. A real "Metaverse" that isn't just another video game would require every tech company to agree on a single standard for a MMO world, and 2. There are zero financial reasons why any other company would agree to a) wa…

Doesn't that same logic apply to the web and html? Are you saying that an open standard like the web couldn't arise in the current political/economic climate?

Re: Meta Myths

#126

Post by jpeter »

stephc_int13 wrote: post #36

I am pretty sure that Kodak or Nokia had pretty healthy results when the wind turned for them. Those kinds of ships are so big that it is very easy for managers, investors and employees to convince themselves that everything is _fine_. The biggest problem, for Meta, in my opinion, is not the brand, not the business model and not the competition. The problem is much worse because it is internal and probably too late t…

What is wrong with their engineering culture? They gave us React and PyTorch. Pretty good track record

Re: Meta Myths

#127

Post by disgruntledphd2 »

drh wrote: post #52
disgruntledphd2 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly, I'm not sure how to say this politely, but your argument does not map to my understanding of how FB ads worked (I was there from 2013-18, predominantly working on ads). Steps 1-3 are correct, step 4 is not. What actually happened is that you'd say I want to spend $10 on FB ads. There's a system called pacing that reduces your bid most of the time so that you don't run out of budget before the end of the day…

Fascinating. Hadn’t thought about the pacing factor. So given this is the case, how does any advertiser scale up their spending without getting disillusioned and abandoning FB ads?

So what I used to tell people to do was to slowly incremente their budget and measure performance at each step. It's kinda stupid, but it worked.

Re: Meta Myths

#128

Post by dont__panic »

nineplay wrote: post #116
dont__panic wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used to use Facebook, but the rampant ads and dark patterns drove me away. I can't stand FB pushing video content in my feed. Some ads are fine (sidebar-only preferably), I understand that you have to pay the bills somehow... but I really don't like "recommended" posts in my feed. The lack of autonomy drove me away. > Today is full of cute Halloween photos, reports on last weekend's high school sports team's result…

> Do Stories and Reels not get in your way? Don't you miss content from school pagse, kids clubs, activities, and team pages because the algorithm decides that it would rather show you yet-another-meme-post? Oh Christ yes, but if I stayed away from everything where dark algorithms decide what BS to show me I'd end up a digital hermit ( except for HN of course ) Still on my list of 'sites with infuriating un-asked-for…

Do you use adblock of any kind? It's interesting to me that the very services you call out -- youtube and reddit specifically -- are services I frequently use because the dark patterns and ads don't effect me much due to ad blocking.

Meanwhile Facebook is essentially immune to content blocking, which made it a very obvious problem for me even years ago.

I have turned into a bit of a digital hermit, though.

Re: Meta Myths

#129

Post by vineyardmike »

noncoml wrote: post #87

Maybe I’m being a bit too cynical, but why would someone take time to write this article if they think Meta is doing great? My guess is that they are stuck with a lot of shares and want the price to go up to get rid of them. If I thought Meta is doing great, I wouldn’t try to convince others that, I would take the opportunity to buy and horde as many stocks as possible.

It’s kinda what business analysts do.. white about the future of businesses. Ben writes about tech companies every day (4 a week?) and one article a week is free to non-subscribers. He’s smart enough to know which ones to give away. My guess is that it’s probs good for business to give away the flashy ones that get people talking.

Re: Meta Myths

#130

Post by throwthere »

pchristensen wrote: post #109
hintymad wrote: post #44

The All-In Podcast had a chart ( https://youtu.be/A-bIpJdaCnM?t=2126 ) that compared the Meta's investment on VR with the investment that changed human history in the past, all inflation adjusted. It's pretty interesting. iPhone: $3.6B, Tesla: $25B, Boeing: $32B, Apollo: $253B. And Meta's Reality Lab: $4B a quarter !

Just to be clear, "Apollo" here is the Apollo space program that invented and manufactured space flight and moon landing and return, over 13 years, in inflation-adjusted dollars. Through all the Meta-verse skepticism, I kept thinking that the payoff could be worth it if they capture the next big platform. But this put the scale of the investment in context, and now I doubt that even the wildest success will payoff fo…

The $250 billion spend is "projected" over 10 years by the commentator.

Would META spend $25 billion/year indefinitely without earning a profit? I don't know but other scenarios seem plausible too.

Post reply on HN