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

491–500 of 1001 posts

Re: Facebook Renames to Meta

#491

Post by lovecg »

filoleg wrote: post #352
brap wrote: post #125

The video they put out is extremely cringe. The whole “metaverse” thing is cringe. It makes me believe Zuckerberg is completely surrounded by yes-men who never challenge him and only tell him what he likes to hear. He is truly detached from us normal people and our human experience.

To be fair, that’s the exact same sentiment I remember reading about Zuck on HN around the time Instagram and WhatsApp acquisitions happened. People were saying it was one of the dumbest business decisions, that Zuck is just desperate and without any brain trying to spend his FB money on acquisitions before FB inevitably dies of irrelevancy, etc. Look at today, and I think most people would agree that acquiring whats…

Also reminds me of all the skepticism surrounding the iPhone launch. I remember those joke ad spoofs making fun of the actual phone feature. Yet here we are and who uses actual voice calls anymore?

Re: Facebook Renames to Meta

#492

Post by cranesnakecode »

The metaverse isn't for us who've already spend 30+ years in tech and realize what tech-obsession steals from you.

It's for the kids who grow up addicted to it and don't realize until their 30s that they've had depresonalization disorders their entire lives.

This will succeed with them.

Re: Facebook Renames to Meta

#493

Post by cbtacy »

kroltan wrote: post #478
cbtacy wrote: post #402

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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?"

No, that question is wrong, because that answer rounds up to 100%. Maybe a vocal minority like us HN-folk, but I don't think that by ourselves we really matter in terms of numbers.

Exactly. You could assume that it's likely that something like 2.75B (out of the est 2.89B) FB users would happily wear (free) physical spyware in this scenario.

Re: Facebook Renames to Meta

#494

Post by 0x4d464d48 »

Kinrany wrote: post #159
0x4d464d48 wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like a Yudkowskyists wet dream to me. Anyone know if people there are heavily influenced by his work?

> Sounds like a Yudkowskyists wet dream to me. How so? Searching for "metaverse" on LW yields 9 results, most of them are irrelevant.

I'm thinking more about how this seems like a template for people to integrate their personal lives into an actual simulation and give a justification for a 'friendly AI' to determine what's best for us.

https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/k3823vuarnmL5Pqin/quantum-no...

https://www.lesswrong.com/tag/coherent-extrapolated-volition

Re: Facebook Renames to Meta

#495

Post by Krasnol »

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.

Wouldn't that be fitting because the word comes from a bad sci-fi pulp story?

Re: Facebook Renames to Meta

#496

Post by 16bytes »

I don't understand what exactly this rename/rebrand entails.

Is it restructuring FB like Google became Alphabet? So, under the "Meta" umbrella, you have all of the individual FB assets, and www.facebook.com just becomes one of those assets?

Some outlets are reporting that, yes, it's something like this:

https://www.npr.org/2021/10/28/1049813246/facebook-new-name-...

This landing page, however, does a terrible job of explaining this. There's this "news" page:

https://about.fb.com/news/2021/10/facebook-company-is-now-me...

But even that is similarly lacking in details. Looking at this page you'd think Oculus is now Meta for how much they emphasize VR/AR and literally nothing about FB and the other apps.

What weird, mixed messaging.

Re: Facebook Renames to Meta

#497

Post by JohnFen »

warning26 wrote: post #463
modeless wrote: post #102

Other 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.

This. Whether it's linked with your other social media or not isn't the issue. And whether it's a "Facebook" account, "Meta" account, an "Oculus" account, or whatever, it's all still an account with Facebook and can be expected to have all of the baggage that comes with an account with Facebook.

Re: Facebook Renames to Meta

#498

Post by micromacrofoot »

Tepix wrote: post #382
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…

Facebook is investing 10 billion dollars into the metaverse this year alone and will increase this amount in the future. They can probably make the Metaverse an open standard like the web and still end up with one of the most popular hubs. If people who value their privacy can setup their own hubs, i'm pretty much OK with Facebook speeding up the advancement of AR/VR technology for the next several years using their…

>They can probably make the Metaverse an open standard like the web

Thanks I needed the laugh.

Re: Facebook Renames to Meta

#499

Post by jazzyjackson »

modeless wrote: post #102

Other 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…

Does facebook still have a real-name policy? interacting with people in the metaverse with my real name is the last thing I want (we all saw ready player one, no? does zuck understand the importance of anonymity?)

Re: Facebook Renames to Meta

#500

Post by cma »

joshmarlow wrote: post #387
vineyardmike wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why NFT? Why can't we just "import jpeg" instead of "link NFT"?

The neat thing about using NFTs is that you can represent the ownership on a public blockchain and that gives you some nice possibilities: 1) storing virtual property rights on a public ledger means that it can be shared among different 'metaverses', which provides friction against vendor lock-in; it limits specific vendors (like Facebook) to only providing UIs to underlying property 2) a single vendor going out of b…

Changing one bit on a texture or shifting a vertex by one bit changes the hash. NFT is useless for implementing IP without some other legal enforcement.
Post reply on HN