Live data from Hacker News

Facebook Renames to Meta

about.facebook.com

731–740 of 1001 posts

Re: Facebook Renames to Meta

#731

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Mark Zuckerberg could not make his salary $800 billion, or donate the entire company to charity. That’s what that means, nothing about business decisions

Mark Zuckerberg couldn't donate Facebook the corporation to charity, but he absolutely could donate all of his personal Facebook shares to charity. If he did that then the charity would have a controlling stake.

Re: Facebook Renames to Meta

#732
post #335

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Keep in mind he used very specific working "personal facebook account" and just announced a new company name 'Meta.' To me that points to a 'log in with Meta' option.

which is probably an improvement if they're kept totally separate from facebook

I'd imagine it's not that hard to tie a "Meta" user back to a "Facebook" user. Seems like it's all just for PR.

Re: Facebook Renames to Meta

#733

If a metaverse is hosted by FB, it'll come with all the drama, nonsense and toxicity we see on there today. The product (ie, today's users of FB) is what stinks to high heavens.

Don't blame the users. Blame the choices that Facebook has made. They WANT the toxicity, it keeps people's eyes on their phone.

Re: Facebook Renames to Meta

#734
post #469

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 mo…

Soviet democracy was never a good faith attempt. I mean, Bolsheviks have forcibly disbanded an elected Constituent Assembly after it deliberated for 13 whole hours (during which it became clear that they don't have majority support there). But it doesn't mean that the fundamental principles of council democracy as they advertised it don't work.

I would suggest looking at libertarian left instead. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communalism, in particular.

Re: Facebook Renames to Meta

#735

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At this point I'm confident I don't want there to be "a metaverse" at all, because under our current social and cultural systems, I am confident it will be very very bad no matter who owns it.

The internet exists under our current systems and, although there are parts of it that suck, it’s dope

So I might have a less optimistic analysis of the plus/minus of the internet, but more importantly, I think it was created under very different circumstances, in it's birth-years, by actors with different interests, values, and goals -- than the "metaverse" will be. The metaverse will be much worse.

Re: Facebook Renames to Meta

#736
post #702

Earlier quoted context omitted.

every hn top thread about fb says "we don't want fb to do this" or "fb is evil" whether you agree or disagree, the more interesting question is the details behind what Meta could build the answer is not federation. federation doesn't scale.

Could you flesh out the "federation doesn't scale" argument a bit?

https://signal.org/blog/the-ecosystem-is-moving/

> So while it’s nice that I’m able to host my own email, that’s also the reason why my email isn’t end-to-end encrypted, and probably never will be. By contrast, WhatsApp was able to introduce end-to-end encryption to over a billion users with a single software update. So long as federation means stasis while centralization means movement, federated protocols are going to have trouble existing in a software climate that demands movement as it does today.

Re: Facebook Renames to Meta

#737

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

I don't know, I feel this sentiment betrays a industry-wide common lack of imagination. We start building digital realities, and our first thought is to try and make them more crappy like the regular one?

Nobody really likes scarcity other than speculators and collectors. We shouldn't be trying to invent more of it, we shouldn't be trying to get rid of the advantages of digital abundance. We should instead be trying to manage and mitigate the limited forms of scarcity that still exist in digital systems -- a long term goal of the Internet should be the complete elimination of most non-physical scarcity. Every time we can make a new asset or utility stop being scarce, that's a step in the right direction.

It's a failure of creativity, vision, and (frankly) courage, that so many people in the tech industry are incapable/unwilling to imagine worlds that aren't artificially hobbled and restricted so that they mimic existing systems.

We build these incredible, world-changing technologies, and then instead of rethinking ownership or creator incentives we just waste a bunch of energy and time building little pretend speculative "art markets" and stressing out over whether somebody might copy and paste a file between two computers or share it online.

Re: Facebook Renames to Meta

#738
post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it FB or social media and big tech in general? I'm confused by the laser focus on FB all of a sudden.

Its people that are the problem, they are just using Facebook as a scapegoat. No matter what they do, they(FB) will get attacked by 50% of the country ... Remove GOP voices spreading crazy shit .. They are suddenly suppressing political voices(censorship). Leave the content up and suddenly Facebook is responsible for domestic terrorist attacks. Honestly Facebook has literally been begging congress to regulate them. T…

While we are at it can we remove Antifa and BLM from facebook?

Re: Facebook Renames to Meta

#740
post #525

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Remember this AR Demo from Apple way back with the iPhone 8? https://www.theverge.com/2017/9/12/16272904/apple-arkit-demo... And what commercial applications of this have we seen in the last 4 years?

Unifi has an AR app for working with their switches[1] that shows some HUD info for each port. I've never used it on my switches personally and judging by that video it's more trouble than it's worth. But it exists. I suppose in a large data centre this might be useful, but the technology still seems pretty immature. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0dlB-UAhTyw

Related tech that got traction is BLE in servers with corresponding apps, like Dell Quick Sync. Lets you flash the ID light of a server from your phone, among lots of other things.
Post reply on HN