What is “Meta”

Hi guys

Have you heart that Facebook changed name to “Meta”? What is “Meta”? How will it change 3d software?

They are going to hire 10,000 developers to get it going.

“No one company will own and operate the metaverse. Like the internet, its key feature will be its openness and interoperability. Bringing this to life will take collaboration and cooperation across companies, developers, creators and policymakers.”

The old adage of ‘If you are not paying for it, you’re not the customer; you’re the product being sold’ applies here.

3 Likes

An attempt of Facebook to whitewash their tainted public image, instead of just having mercy and throwing in the towel.

1 Like

Also:

In terms of software, Horizon Worlds (Facebook Horizon), the base platform for virtual worlds for Facebook’s metaverse, has a very interesting programmable VR modelling system that I haven’t tried yet because it’s in private beta, but it’s nothing new either.

In terms of hardware, that’s where they have something to innovate, as they aim to create VR/AR devices that people want to use for work. Their next high-end glasses coming out next year look like they will be a step in this direction but I don’t think they will reach this point until AR technology reaches its minimum development. Apple is also coming out with AR glasses, perhaps as soon as next year, which is starting to look like a mass-or-professional-oriented new way of interacting with software. Then Meta, or any of its competitors, will let to redefine the day-to-day 3D modelling experience.

Nowadays with Gravity Sketch you can already feel how it will be modelled in the future, but the current hardware is not comfortable enough to spend 8 hours with it. I don’t think that designers are going to work with VR devices because it’s not healthy to have a screen one centimetre away from your eyes all day long. It should be AR glasses where the digital/light is not necessarily the whole screen, but just the model.

I don’t think it’s just to wash their image, it doesn’t make sense to call it Facebook Inc. when it’s Facebook, Instagram, Whatsapp, Oculus, Novi… They needed another name for the holding company. It also makes sense to change the brand because their objectives have changed.

Now, no one seems to understand what is going on here. FB has gone 3 or 5 years ahead and sold smoke in its Facebook Connect, to attract creators, developers and investors and to make it known to the general public. They are evangelising about the metaverse and people are buying into its discourse and that is dangerous, seeing the good or seeing the bad, but without looking beyond. The metaverse is nothing new, there are already several, VR or PC, with or without cryptoeconomy, like Decentraland, TheSandbox, among others. What FB wants is to win the war for the metaverse platform to become massive, because this will open a gigantic economic potential. And this is dangerous, because neither FB nor Horizon are decentralised, and therefore, their CEOs are going to decide what is good for the company and not for the people. If people choose a decentralised platform as the mainstream platform, decisions are made collectively. This is fundamental and the main difference for whether the metaverse is implemented well or badly for users, because if it is not decentralised, FB will choose which tokens to use instead of the community choosing. For example, there are already tokens/cryptocurrencies like Basic Attention Token (BAT) in the Brave browser, which give you money for viewing ads, or projects that want our personal data to be tokenised so that companies like FB can pay us for the data we want to share. These things that are good for people are very unlikely to happen on centralised platforms that live off ads. In addition to having no control over the fees charged for each transaction. It’s critical that people have control over the tokens that the metaverse platform supports, because that’s how certain ideas are going to be plugged in or not in the digital future. The metaverse is not like VRChat or Sims or Secondlife or any game, as many people think, it is something much more fundamental and broader, the idea of replacing websites with virtual spaces. And if we don’t counter-evangelise people, we run the risk of tokenomics running with FB tokens on a private platform instead of the platform being community-driven.

1 Like

Ah, them privacy invading glasses.

We’re getting closer, and closer to total tracking of persons whether they know it or not.

I think having AR, VR, XR is great. But having people willfully carry devices that record at all times what they see and hear is a scary thing.

Google glasses were a social and privacy problem (that they looked dorky was not the problem), I hope people keep seeing the Facebook glasses as the same danger. It is sad to see how easily people give up on these things when dangers are dressed up looking cool enough to direct the critical thought away.

5 Likes

This must be Zuck’s wet dream. Projecting ads dirtectly on to peoples retina.

1 Like

You have to remember Facebook’s origins - will glasses be used to collect “vital” statistics for him?

1 Like