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

401–410 of 1001 posts

Re: Facebook Renames to Meta

#401

Post by goatlover »

goatlover wrote: post #266
distrill wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think it's particularly sudden, although I am also confused by the laser focus.

Before a few weeks ago, it was all social media and big tech that was getting a bad rap for ruining society, but now it's almost exclusively FB.

I forgot to add ruining the "fabric" of society, as the media and politicians love to say about whatever X is doing that. I have no idea what the "fabric" of society is supposed to be. But I'm pretty sure it was already "ruined" by tv, rock & roll and video games.

Re: Facebook Renames to Meta

#402

Post by cbtacy »

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?

That's the wrong question.

The right question is "how many FB users would accept a free headset that advertisers paid for in exchange for access to your data and exclusive rights to place ads in front of you?"

Re: Facebook Renames to Meta

#403

Post by Dowwie »

Often, Hacker News sentiment winds up terribly wrong. With that in consideration, Metaverse will probably be huge and is worth considering.

Is it going to be a walled garden? To what extent will it be open?

Re: Facebook Renames to Meta

#404

Post by throw10920 »

astlouis44 wrote: post #277

Sorry Zuckerberg, but the metaverse will NOT be a walled garden, tied to a social media company. Is the the internet, and more specifically, THE WEB itself as an immersive, distributed spatial ecosystem of worlds. The metaverse needs to be interoperable above all else, and this is unachievable with the equivalent of native, vendor locked apps controlled by an entity. The web already does this, as every site is govern…

> the metaverse will NOT be a walled garden, tied to a social media company

> links to a Discord server

Re: Facebook Renames to Meta

#406

Post by _yoqn »

silentsea90 wrote: post #375

I dislike FB, but I think it is very cool that Zuck has the guts to radically change the company's identity around a vision that may be arbitrarily far (see: Oculus/Magic Leap's promise vs progress). Most big companies are petrified to make changes that kill the dying golden goose.

Hopefully this does irreversible damage to Facebook and they have to sell off chunks of their monopoly to survive.

Re: Facebook Renames to Meta

#407

Post by charcircuit »

arduinomancer wrote: post #114

The presentation talks a lot about the metaverse being built on open standards and protocols but it still seems extremely vague Have they actually detailed this anywhere? For example a most basic question: what 3D engine is this going to run on? Is that engine open source? What are the formats for assets/models/materials? What blockchain is hosting the NFT assets?

>what 3D engine is this going to run on?

>Is that engine open source?

That would be up to the implementers similar to how there are different browser engines.

Re: Facebook Renames to Meta

#408

Post by cpeterso »

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…

> I hope all the other players in this space band together and form an open, federated metaverse.

Seems unlikely. Google, Apple, and Microsoft would surely each want their own proprietary metaverses. Mozilla is experimenting in the metaverse space linking VR and web with Mozilla Hubs: https://hubs.mozilla.com/

Re: Facebook Renames to Meta

#409

Post by gdilla »

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…

It's their metaverse. A walled garden metaverse. So maybe that isn't really a metaverse, but what they want you to think about a metaverse.
Post reply on HN