Facebook lates to the party - meta.ua
Facebook Renames to Meta
461–470 of 1001 posts
Re: Facebook Renames to Meta
#462Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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…
>I don't think Facebook is constitutionally able to give up ad revenue gains This "fiduciary duty" meme really needs to die. Seriously the idea of fiduciary duty [to maximixe profit] is dystopian, corporations don't fuck us over because they have to they do it because they can. Edit: clarify
It's especially dubious in Facebook's case because Mark Zuckerberg controls the majority of voting shares. If he wanted to run the company straight into the ground I doubt anyone could stop him.
Re: Facebook Renames to Meta
#463Other interesting things said during the keynote: "and frankly, as we've heard your feedback more broadly, we're working on making it so you can log into Quest with an account other than your personal Facebook account. We're starting to test support for work accounts soon, and we're working on making a broader shift here within the next year. I know this is a big deal for a lot of people. Not everyone wants their soc…
I assume this just means that they'll require a "Meta" account instead of a Facebook account, and it will come with all the same problems as creating a Facebook account.
Also, their "support" for sideloading, while better than nothing, requires a valid phone number or credit card number to sideload anything.
Re: Facebook Renames to Meta
#464It's almost like Zuck saw all the ads in Ready Player One and read about all negative shit in Snow Crash and went "yes, I'd like that"
If it's gonna be an ad-based business model, we might end up here, HYPER-REALITY: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJg02ivYzSs
Re: Facebook Renames to Meta
#465Wait is this like Google inc rebranding as Alphabet and owning Google as its main product, or is the social media platform being renamed to Meta along with the company?
Like Alphabet
Re: Facebook Renames to Meta
#466I know most of us aren't looking forward to a future with Facebook in control, but ask yourself: How many times has Zuckerberg been wrong about tech trends? I can't think of a single time. He's gotten every major investment correct. This metaverse idea will either be the first major Facebook misstep, or it's a future we should embrace sooner than later. You stand to win big if you're an early adopter on any given pla…
[deleted]
Re: Facebook Renames to Meta
#467Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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. One step closer to real life Shadowrun.
Or Neal Stephenson's Snow Crash, which coined the term "metaverse."
I genuinely wonder why Facebook thinks that using that term is a smart thing, considering that Snow Crash is a pretty heavily dystopian novel where everything is owned and run by corrupt, powerful, and abusive corporations.
It really seems like they're tipping their hand here.
Re: Facebook Renames to Meta
#468This is going to be the Futurama metaverse where you have to fight ads everywhere to go.
Re: Facebook Renames to Meta
#469Earlier quoted context omitted.
Virtual reality was always dystopian. It's what happens when we don't have a frontier and turn inward to computer aided fantasy and isolation. One of the best dystopian explanations for the Fermi paradox is that intelligences eventually figure out how to immerse themselves in high fidelity fantasy worlds and basically sit around and masturbate until some black swan event like a planet killer astroid or a gamma ray bu…
There are also leftist visions of a future world where we actually address the core problems plaguing our world and give workers democratic control over their own work, instead of leaving that up to wage slave owners who view all of us as human resources.
I didn't include that because I don't see a workable, viable proposal. My intention was to list futures that I can see actually happening.
I'm not against what you describe nor do I think it's mutually exclusive with option (3), but so far IMHO leftists have offered no solution to some of the inherent problems of this vision.
The biggest one is how to make democracy work.
How do you do good work under a democratic model? The Soviet bureaucratic model isn't truly democratic and as every engineer knows nothing good ever comes from a committee. How can democratic governance produce efficient, polished, practical, cost effective outputs?
How do you avoid perverse incentives, runaway complexity, endless bikeshedding, or stagnation due to "vetocracy" like what exists with California housing? How do you prevent the seemingly natural formation of an oligarchy?
So far I don't think democracy has ever existed except at tribal scale (below Dunbar's Number). All former and current attempts are oligarchies with a degree of democratic veto power or a democratic facade.
I think this problem is closely isomorphic or maybe even identical to the open problem of efficient and secure fully decentralized computing and global consensus in distributed systems without hidden centralization or brute force approaches like Bitcoin proof of work. (... and Bitcoin PoW is in reality an oligarchy if you look at the largest pools ...)
Re: Facebook Renames to Meta
#470Earlier quoted context omitted.
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?
> I've seen no social media that didn't eventually become toxic or that didn't feed on human attention
What about email?