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

Facebook Renames to Meta

about.facebook.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 1001 posts

Re: Facebook Renames to Meta

#361

Post by tomjen3 »

danso wrote: post #5
minimaxir wrote: post #2

The rebrand was introduced as a "One More Thing" during the event keynote. A 2007 "One More Thing" was the announcement of the iPhone and the future of mobile computing. Now a 2021 "One More Thing" is the announcement of a company rebrand to avoid government regulation.

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

I look forward to that, since maybe I will then know what the hell the metaverse is supposed to be.

Re: Facebook Renames to Meta

#362

Post by adventured »

carbonguy wrote: post #304
daviding wrote: post #36

If 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…

> If 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. I'm confident I don't want them to own it - or for it to be owned by a single party of any kind, for that matter. > 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? I mean, that would be nice f…

> How much would it cost to just send every one of them an Oculus headset for free?

$200+ billion. They can't afford it. They couldn't get the manufacturing for it, either.

Re: Facebook Renames to Meta

#363

Post by CodeGlitch »

Ansil849 wrote: post #20

In London, in the area around the London Eye, there is a tourist trap that offers a very poor 'haunted house' type of attraction, usually something having to do with zombies. As each iteration of this tourist trap gains a reputation for being total rubbish and gains one star reviews online, every few months the attraction rebrands to another name.

Takeaways in the UK also do this after the Foods Standards Agency shuts them down.

Re: Facebook Renames to Meta

#367

Post by lovecg »

glogla wrote: post #194
jfmc wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A Facebook-controlled metaverse, rising gas prices... it is only a matter of time that humans ends up being used as batteries.

Fun fact, in Matrix (if that's what you're referring to) people were originally enslaved by the machines to provide compute capacity of their brains. The battery part came later, when someone (studio executives?) jumped in, and said that's too smart and people wouldn't get it so it was changed to batteries.

That makes way more sense too. Human brains are pretty complex devices, it’s easy to believe the machines didn’t figure out how to make something comparable and opted for human farming instead. On the other hand humans make very crappy batteries, how does that science even work.

Re: Facebook Renames to Meta

#368

Post by akudha »

5faulker wrote: post #16
minimaxir wrote: post #2

The rebrand was introduced as a "One More Thing" during the event keynote. A 2007 "One More Thing" was the announcement of the iPhone and the future of mobile computing. Now a 2021 "One More Thing" is the announcement of a company rebrand to avoid government regulation.

Still a faceless corporation though.

Having watched the downfall of MySpace, Orkut etc, I thought (hoped) same thing might happen to FaceBook. But now it feels like they are going to be around, for a long, long time. I don't know if anyone is even trying to take on them, Google seems to have given up on their social products. FB might not be fashionable anymore, people might even curse them, but they'll continue to use them at some level :( And they have enough money to keep buying other companies and stay at least somewhat relevant

It feels like only regulators can take on them, but that too is unlikely to happen, except some feeble attempts in Europe

Re: Facebook Renames to Meta

#369

Post by charcircuit »

tlrobinson wrote: post #221
daviding wrote: post #36

If 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'm not sure I want Facebook to own it. I know I don't. It's a dystopian nightmare for an advertising company to be building "the metaverse". I hope all the other players in this space band together and form an open, federated metaverse. It's one use-case I can kind of see benefiting from blockchain protocols: enforcing digital scarcity in a federated metaverse, by recording transfers of avatars and assets between…

>enforcing digital scarcity in a federated metaverse

Until someone dumps it and reuploads whatever for free.

Post reply on HN