MANGA sounds more fun then FAANG so that’s nice
[deleted]
Facebook Renames to Meta
131–140 of 1001 posts
Re: Facebook Renames to Meta
#132no one cares
Re: Facebook Renames to Meta
#133My god, if you get it, you get it. They are going all in on metaverse / have decided that the future of oculus is the primary long term bet, not facebook itself. And they have the money to make it so. This is incredibly scary, and probably a good investment.
I think their internal definition of metaverse is probably less literal than people in the media seem to picture - I think they are actually betting on the future of however people communicate, whatever that ends up looking like, be that WhatsApp, social media, VR or something else entirely.
Re: Facebook Renames to Meta
#134If 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…
That's what I wonder. Early VR adopters/technologists hate what happened to Oculus and there aren't a lot of newcomers to that market. I don't think cheaper headsets are going to fix that in the near future so I don't know whom they're targeting. Seems risky to lean into something where the experts already think you screwed up.
Quest 2 is outselling past VR headsets by leaps and bounds according to news reports. The decision to make a standalone headset and build their own app platform was absolutely the right one from a growth standpoint, even if the hardcore VR consumers aren't biting. Early VR adopters are going to buy the next best product and have no loyalty.
Re: Facebook Renames to Meta
#135While their mission of connecting people sounds nice on paper, they have shown over and over that they place profit first, which is not necessarily wrong for a corporation, but this incentives engagement over connection.
We've seen that as Facebook grew bigger and the engagement algorithms took over, that the worst of humanity is brought out. Despite there being genuine connection and overall improvement to people's lives happening on FB; if not people wouldn't be using it, but extremism, addiction and hate have become staples of the platform at large.
Frankly, I don't trust FB to fix these issues so I am immediately pessimistic about Meta, but the reality very well may be that us humans enjoy extremism content, don't mind digital addictions, and feed off hate and FB just brings out the raw truth in us.
Overall, I think FB needs a different business model other than advertising off engagement if they want to turn the page and appeal to the better parts of people.
Re: Facebook Renames to Meta
#136Re: Facebook Renames to Meta
#137If 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…
> Federate it a bit more than they are comfortable with, to at least give it a chance.
I have yet to see a single federated system that has demonstrated commercial success. There's no reason to believe that strategy would result in greater success than Facebook's usual playbook, which is proven.
Re: Facebook Renames to Meta
#138If 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…
There needs to be many metaverses, and NFT's should be able to be shared between them. It's dangerous to think about the prospect of a major company like Facebook (Or a DAO for that matter) locking up the entire universe.
Agreed, I'm pro multimetaverse. I'm also pro democratic-representation metaverse.
Re: Facebook Renames to Meta
#139I was curious what meta.com looked like before FB took control of the domain. Recent snapshots aren't loading for me, but post-2015 it looks like it was taken over by an AI company — the page titles include "Meta — Science Discovered" [0] and "Meta — AI for Science".
Prior to that, since around 2012 it was an unused Wordpress site [1] that redirected to meta.compgu.com (which is now "tekman.cc", a consulting firm or something.
And its earliest owner (at least as captured by wayback) was a California events company "Meta Productions: Producers of Meet, Mix and Match. Promoting awareness through metamorphosis" [2]
edit: out of curiosity, I just noticed that one of the most famous domains that refused to sell out [3] — steam.com — is now apparently for sale?
[0] https://web.archive.org/web/20160110141037/http://meta.com/
[1] https://web.archive.org/web/20150228180854/http://meta.compg...
[2] https://web.archive.org/web/20081002050002/http://www.meta.c...
https://web.archive.org/web/20100425061122/http://meta.com/
[3] https://web.archive.org/web/20161023041828/http://steam.com/
Re: Facebook Renames to Meta
#140If 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…
I thought the market has repeatedly shown there isn't much demand for persistent virtual worlds?
Don't question it, just drink your Kool-Aid.