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

Meta Myths

stratechery.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 210 posts

Re: Meta Myths

#71

Post by dont__panic »

nemothekid wrote: post #53
mjr00 wrote: post #33

Interesting article. People really want Meta to fail because the "metaverse" is one of the dumbest pivots of an established company of all time. Since the pivot and rename happened a year ago, the metaverse has probably bombed -- and I say probably only because nobody can define exactly what it is, still , beyond people having VR meetings with odd pseudo-Mii avatars -- and the investors convinced that Zuckerberg was…

> People really want Meta to fail because the "metaverse" is one of the dumbest pivots of an established company of all time I believe people want Meta to fail because the spent the better part of last 5 years completely eviscerating their reputation and goodwill. While Facebook, at its prepandemic peak was hemorrhaging young users and becoming known as the platform for misinformation and arguments due to the chase f…

Exactly. I also want Meta to fail because the company has proven itself to be immoral and a poor steward of meaningful social contact over the internet, but my biggest beef is with the rotting Facebook platform that has turned into something awful over the past 10 years.

That being said, I want Meta's involvement in a "metaverse" to fail too, because I can't imagine living in a world where Zuck sinks his dark pattern and advertising fangs into an even more immersive version of today's manipulative social media. They've done enough damage as is.

Re: Meta Myths

#72

Post by Ekaros »

dont__panic wrote: post #69

Myth 1: Users Are Deserting Facebook ..The problem with this narrative is that Meta is still adding users: the company is up to 2.93 billion Daily Active Users (DAUs), an increase of 50 million, and 3.71 billion Monthly Active Users (MAUs), an increase of 60 million.. I've been wondering about this for a while now: who are these people who are still using Facebook every day? All of my family has reduced facebook usag…

I have an account but I can't remember last time I logged in.

Maybe it is users that are forced to use it to check some restaurants or likes Facebook page? And even then be annoyed about the popups...

Re: Meta Myths

#73

Post by ernestipark »

dont__panic wrote: post #69

Myth 1: Users Are Deserting Facebook ..The problem with this narrative is that Meta is still adding users: the company is up to 2.93 billion Daily Active Users (DAUs), an increase of 50 million, and 3.71 billion Monthly Active Users (MAUs), an increase of 60 million.. I've been wondering about this for a while now: who are these people who are still using Facebook every day? All of my family has reduced facebook usag…

I think we have to adjust our understanding of what 'using' Facebook means.

Despite its flaws FB has done a good job of layering useful products on top of the social network despite the original purpose of Facebook seemingly losing popularity. In my circles, the typical news feed and posting updates part of Facebook is pretty much dead, and I never use those features personally anymore. BUT Marketplace, Messenger, and niche groups are all very valuable. It's changed from 'something cool' to a utility.

Also, given these DAUs are measured in billions and there are users all over the globe, chances are usage in different parts of the world and for different ages and demographics looks incredibly different.

Re: Meta Myths

#74

Post by optimuspaul »

sofixa wrote: post #68
miketery wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The metaverse is not bombing. It’s simply not tied to one platform. Between TikTok, Roblox, Minecraft, call of duty (and other triple A multiplayer games), we’re already there. Meta can’t win this one. Same way that no single game publisher can dominate video games. Even the hardware, fine meta becomes the first “Nintendo”. So what? The PlayStations and Xbox’s will come. No one will let Meta have a monopoly.

> Between TikTok, Roblox, Minecraft, call of duty (and other triple A multiplayer games), we’re already there. How are those "metaverse"?

> How are those "metaverse"?

Good question. My guess is because those things are all 3D virtual worlds (to some extent) and/or a platform that is focused on social connection. Obviously they all need some connective tissue and evolution before they are a legit meta verse.

Re: Meta Myths

#75

Post by madeofpalk »

sofixa wrote: post #68
miketery wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The metaverse is not bombing. It’s simply not tied to one platform. Between TikTok, Roblox, Minecraft, call of duty (and other triple A multiplayer games), we’re already there. Meta can’t win this one. Same way that no single game publisher can dominate video games. Even the hardware, fine meta becomes the first “Nintendo”. So what? The PlayStations and Xbox’s will come. No one will let Meta have a monopoly.

> Between TikTok, Roblox, Minecraft, call of duty (and other triple A multiplayer games), we’re already there. How are those "metaverse"?

Well, that goes to the question of "what is does 'metaverse' mean anyway?"

I haven't seen a description of what 'metaverse' means that doesn't just describe Minecraft (which I love).

Re: Meta Myths

#76

Post by r00fus »

miketery wrote: post #57
mjr00 wrote: post #33

Interesting article. People really want Meta to fail because the "metaverse" is one of the dumbest pivots of an established company of all time. Since the pivot and rename happened a year ago, the metaverse has probably bombed -- and I say probably only because nobody can define exactly what it is, still , beyond people having VR meetings with odd pseudo-Mii avatars -- and the investors convinced that Zuckerberg was…

The metaverse is not bombing. It’s simply not tied to one platform. Between TikTok, Roblox, Minecraft, call of duty (and other triple A multiplayer games), we’re already there. Meta can’t win this one. Same way that no single game publisher can dominate video games. Even the hardware, fine meta becomes the first “Nintendo”. So what? The PlayStations and Xbox’s will come. No one will let Meta have a monopoly.

Zuckerberg fancies Meta is "IOI" from Ready Player One. Let's leave alone the fact that the state of the art is simply not capable with our technology.

What is the Minecraft/Roblox economy as opposed to the rest of the economy? Like .05%? Growth given the lack of actual capabilities is likely flatline.

Metaverse was obviously a BS pivot. Question is what Zuckerberg is covering up before they pivot back.

Re: Meta Myths

#77

Post by r00fus »

eklitzke wrote: post #64
alerter wrote: post #37

I always wondered if it was a mistake for Facebook to try to rapidly casualise VR after acquiring Oculus. If they spent even a small fraction of their metaverse billions developing high-end, niche products (flight/mech sims etc.) then they could cultivate a loyal base of affluent users. It probably wouldn't be profitable by itself, but it would grow their user base and act as a nice showcase of what VR is capable of.…

To be fair, the Meta Quest Pro is a pretty high-end product.

For $1500. Who's buying?

Re: Meta Myths

#78

Post by JustSomeNobody »

giantrobot wrote: post #48
mjr00 wrote: post #33

Interesting article. People really want Meta to fail because the "metaverse" is one of the dumbest pivots of an established company of all time. Since the pivot and rename happened a year ago, the metaverse has probably bombed -- and I say probably only because nobody can define exactly what it is, still , beyond people having VR meetings with odd pseudo-Mii avatars -- and the investors convinced that Zuckerberg was…

I don't think it's a question of can Meta walk things back but whether Zuckerberg has the humility to do so. It certainly doesn't seem like Zuckerberg possesses that ability so it's more likely they'll just double down on "the metaverse".

Well, his avatar does have legs now...

But, yeah, he's too desperate to be/have the next great (hardware) platform. He wants the "metaverse" to be what Apple and Google have with their hardware and app stores. There's no way he walks it back.

Re: Meta Myths

#79

Post by mjr00 »

miketery wrote: post #57
mjr00 wrote: post #33

Interesting article. People really want Meta to fail because the "metaverse" is one of the dumbest pivots of an established company of all time. Since the pivot and rename happened a year ago, the metaverse has probably bombed -- and I say probably only because nobody can define exactly what it is, still , beyond people having VR meetings with odd pseudo-Mii avatars -- and the investors convinced that Zuckerberg was…

The metaverse is not bombing. It’s simply not tied to one platform. Between TikTok, Roblox, Minecraft, call of duty (and other triple A multiplayer games), we’re already there. Meta can’t win this one. Same way that no single game publisher can dominate video games. Even the hardware, fine meta becomes the first “Nintendo”. So what? The PlayStations and Xbox’s will come. No one will let Meta have a monopoly.

This is exactly what I mean when I say "nobody can define exactly what [the metaverse] is." The metaverse is simultaneously VR-based business collaboration software, but also decade-old sandbox video games. Web3 and NFTs often pop up in explanations, too.

Re: Meta Myths

#80

Post by JeremyNT »

miketery wrote: post #57
mjr00 wrote: post #33

Interesting article. People really want Meta to fail because the "metaverse" is one of the dumbest pivots of an established company of all time. Since the pivot and rename happened a year ago, the metaverse has probably bombed -- and I say probably only because nobody can define exactly what it is, still , beyond people having VR meetings with odd pseudo-Mii avatars -- and the investors convinced that Zuckerberg was…

The metaverse is not bombing. It’s simply not tied to one platform. Between TikTok, Roblox, Minecraft, call of duty (and other triple A multiplayer games), we’re already there. Meta can’t win this one. Same way that no single game publisher can dominate video games. Even the hardware, fine meta becomes the first “Nintendo”. So what? The PlayStations and Xbox’s will come. No one will let Meta have a monopoly.

> Between TikTok, Roblox, Minecraft, call of duty (and other triple A multiplayer games), we’re already there.

I'm going to need a definition for "metaverse" here because that doesn't sound like what I would imagine. You have listed a social media site and some video games. Both social media and video games have been with us for a long time, and if Facebook had just said "we want to work on social media and video games" then nobody would bat an eye.

Of course, that's not what they said. They now call the company "Meta" and toss the "metaverse" label around. This implies that they at least view it as something different in some substantive way.

I guess, either way, it's a failure. If it's just a trick to seem innovative by slapping a new label on old things, then that's a failure, because people now seem to expect them to do something more. If they view it as something novel that's going to "eat the world," that's also a failure (at least so far), since it clearly hasn't.

Post reply on HN