Bahahahaha!! Pathetic.
Facebook Renames to Meta
761–770 of 1001 posts
Re: Facebook Renames to Meta
#762My god, if you get it, you get it. They are going all in on metaverse / have decided that the future of oculus is the primary long term bet, not facebook itself. And they have the money to make it so. This is incredibly scary, and probably a good investment.
Not a chance. I've been wrong about a lot of things tech, probably even most things, but this isn't something I think most people want. Metaverses have always been niche. Most people don't like things attached to their head. Remember 3D TVs? But, perhaps you and they are right. For the first time in my life, I honestly feel like 'if this is the future, I want no part in it.' Please don't take this as like, suicidal o…
3D TVs were the clearest market signal that the market doesn't want this. It was not subtle. And yet everyone just acts like that didn't happen.
Re: Facebook Renames to Meta
#763Metastatic.
Re: Facebook Renames to Meta
#764Earlier quoted context omitted.
>b) How much would it cost to just send every one of them an Oculus headset for free? $300 * 3 billion people, so $900 Billion give or take which coincidentally is right around the market cap of the entire company.
retail price != manufacturing price, so say just 2-300 bil
Facebook isn't making any money selling headsets at $300
Re: Facebook Renames to Meta
#765Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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 advanta…
Absolutely - this is what frustrates me most about the discourse around the metaverse - the insistence that a virtual world of limitless possibility be unnecessarily bound by the worst aspects of the real world.
Doubly infuriating is the smug insistence that this is being done for the "benefit" of creators - as if the point of digital scarcity is a means to benefit creators rather than the speculators who will fuel the secondary market - from which creators see little to no gain. Surprise, Pablo Picasso (nor his estate) doesn't see a dime from the speculation on his art at high-society art auctions - the verifiability of art (i.e., NFTs) benefits overwhelmingly speculators, not creators.
I watched the FB keynote today and some parts were just dystopian. Instead of street art being on a wall for everyone to look at, the VR "street art" expired after mere seconds, requiring you to "tip" the creator to simply keep looking at it? Can we not financialize every moment of existence? FB's vision for the metaverse feels a lot like being nickeled and dimed every 3 seconds for all eternity, where every interaction is commercialized. It's hard to imagine any kind of real shared human experience emerging from this. It feels like FB looked at the state of the real world - where commercial interests are grafted onto the human experience, and decided to just skip the human experience part and go straight to the commercialization part.
Digital scarcity is just such a depressing failure of imagination - artists can produce copies of their art at literally zero marginal cost! Instead of producing art for one customer at a time, they can now produce art that can be sold en masse - so everyone can have access to the art they admire. Why does a pair of virtual metaverse sneakers need to be one-of-a-kind? Why can't we instead sell copies of the sneakers to everyone who wants it, and the price would be low because the marginal cost of production is zero? Why can't we revel in the widespread abundance - provided to both the community and the creator - rather than wallow in the artificially-induced scarcity?
Re: Facebook Renames to Meta
#766Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's a concept I find really useful: Acquired Situational Narcissism. If somebody spends enough time in an environment where everything is about them, they can easily come to believe everything is about them. Another thing I think is at play is people confusing luck with genius. Zuckerberg is clearly smart, but Facebook was also a right-time, right-place thing. As FaceMash and Facebook showed, he understood his au…
I'm trying to word this kindly, but I think you should instead look at the concept of "Parasocial Relationships" if you think it's appropriate to diagnose Mark Zuckerberg with Acquired Situational Narcissism. You do not know him, you have not met him and it does not make sense to try to diagnose a public figure based on what you've been presented by either his own press releases or media coverage of him. You and the…
I’ve met him. I know the people who made him. I know the people who went to his wedding.
I vouch for the parent commenter’s statement.
Re: Facebook Renames to Meta
#767If 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…
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.
ill bite. does someone want to explain when and how a federated system will reach mass adoption and not get rekt by competition?
Re: Facebook Renames to Meta
#768Earlier 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
Our current systems have made me seriously consider the need for a real-life Butlerian jihad under which all computer technology would be banned, because humans simply aren't ready for computers yet.
Re: Facebook Renames to Meta
#769Earlier quoted context omitted.
I also blinked at that. But then took it to mean constitutionally in a pure sense - whether they can keep a strength of belief enough to follow through. Unrelated to 'The Constitution' from a US citizen's point of view. Although now I'm pondering just how misplaced and powerful our reverence of that cobbled together document is.
It’s basically a peace treaty. There are things about it that I think are incredibly counterproductive to democracy (and they were designed to be so!), but I shudder at the thought of rolling the dice on scrapping or heavily re-writing it.
It seems like the government agencies are more than comfortable ignoring it anyway, frankly.
Re: Facebook Renames to Meta
#770Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's a concept I find really useful: Acquired Situational Narcissism. If somebody spends enough time in an environment where everything is about them, they can easily come to believe everything is about them. Another thing I think is at play is people confusing luck with genius. Zuckerberg is clearly smart, but Facebook was also a right-time, right-place thing. As FaceMash and Facebook showed, he understood his au…
I'm trying to word this kindly, but I think you should instead look at the concept of "Parasocial Relationships" if you think it's appropriate to diagnose Mark Zuckerberg with Acquired Situational Narcissism. You do not know him, you have not met him and it does not make sense to try to diagnose a public figure based on what you've been presented by either his own press releases or media coverage of him. You and the…
None of us know anything, so why talk at all?