Earlier quoted context omitted.
For better or worse, it does seem Zuckerberg is as invested in making the "metaverse" the new future of Facebook as Jobs was with Apple and the iPhone
In this case, worse. Definitely worse.
Meta-worse
Facebook Renames to Meta
251–260 of 1001 posts
Re: Facebook Renames to Meta
#252If a metaverse is hosted by FB, it'll come with all the drama, nonsense and toxicity we see on there today. The product (ie, today's users of FB) is what stinks to high heavens.
It isn't the users, it's the platform and underlying philosophy of the business. They are factory-farming humans' attention; it's no wonder the result is dystopian.
I see this sentiment posted often on HN but I've seen no social media that didn't eventually become toxic or that didn't feed on human attention, this website included. What good is a platform if nobody pays attention to it? And if people are paying attention to it, how do you plan to prevent them from fighting, competing with each other over every little thing, and spreading misinformation?
Re: Facebook Renames to Meta
#253The screens are blank at first, but finally the same image snaps into existence
on all four of them at once. It is an image consisting of words; it says
IF THIS WERE A VIRUS YOU WOULD BE DEAD NOW
FORTUNATELY IT'S NOT
THE METAVERSE IS A DANGEROUS PLACE; HOW'S YOUR SECURITY?
CALL HIRO PROTAGONIST SECURITY ASSOCIATES FOR A FREE INITIAL CONSULTATION.
Re: Facebook Renames to Meta
#254"The concept [Meta] originates from Snow Crash, a dystopian novel from the 1990s in which people flee the crumbling real world to be fully immersed in a virtual one"
Facebook is creating a virtual world to allow us to escape the deteriorating state of this one.
Re: Facebook Renames to Meta
#255Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is it FB or social media and big tech in general? I'm confused by the laser focus on FB all of a sudden.
FB being the biggest and the one most likely to shape our society, they deserve the spotlight.
Or congress could do its job and not expect a private company to regulate "truth".
Re: Facebook Renames to Meta
#256If 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…
Dont worry. Unless they acquire it, they aint building it.
Re: Facebook Renames to Meta
#257Still a terrible, terrible organisation that's detrimental to societies and humankind as such.
Is it FB or social media and big tech in general? I'm confused by the laser focus on FB all of a sudden.
> I'm confused by the laser focus on FB all of a sudden.
You have to look at in the context of the 2016 election. Once it was discovered that the winning team utilized Facebook in a way the losing team had no concept of (or more likely they simply didn’t use said concept as effectively), Facebook has been singled out and targeted by most media outlets for being evil and in need of strict government regulations, to protect the children and democracy and society, among other things.
Yes, FB had negative press prior. But this was the clear turning point in press coverage and governmental oversight and it was like a light switch.
I can’t say I’m disappointed in the slightest about that, or that they’re wrong. I despise Facebook. But I do find the reasoning behind this all a very disturbing extension of the “cancel culture” we’re in today. The establishment doesn’t like not having a monopoly on the spread of information, and it is fighting back.
Re: Facebook Renames to Meta
#258Grim. Much nicer to go outside and enjoy creation. Facebook and Meta are no doubt austere in comparison. To quote Vonnegut, it is you who should be doing the becoming, not the damn fool computer.
Re: Facebook Renames to Meta
#259I somehow feel culturally appropriated.
Re: Facebook Renames to Meta
#260My 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.
Honestly, I think this is less scary than having Facebook acting as a "public square". A meta-verse has a higher bar of entry than a website - including specialized hardware - and it's less likely that governments and businesses will distribute information exclusively in some meta-verse vs. it just being another channel for content distribution.
Websites once required "specialized hardware". And if you've got today's top end VR rigs, it's sorta obvious that the world is going to go this way - it's too good, and productivity is enhanced on the level of "bicycle for the mind". Plus it'll get way cheaper in the future. Note that I'm not talking about entertainment usecases, which are also good - I'm saying metaverse is clearly the future of work, with massive ramifications if Meta is able to invest enough to make it appealing to regular people. And I think Facebook has way more than enough resources to make this a reality.
Right now, work in the metaverse still looks like 8+ emulated screens floating in a sphere around you. And this is probably not the long term best way to work. The real question is what are the new primitives, is there a new underlying platform, can everyone get equal access to that platform, and who owns that platform.
Just like Apple is making intel chips obsolete with the M1 on Mac, Meta probably is aiming to make laptops obsolete/niche in the long run.