Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

VincentNacon t1_itbo021 wrote

Shhhh... let him fail some more, we want his metaverse to be successful at dragging his company and him down with it.

64

domino2064 t1_itbshgt wrote

Eh. It probably won't though. Not as long as grandma and the aunts and uncles keep committing themselves to social data collection and various experiments.

Want to kill meta and change how social media impacts us? Ban automatic, opt in clauses to these experiments in user agreements. Require users to have to manually review a separate agreement that they have to consent to with a digital signature and initials in 3+ places and then require full disclosure for all experiments.

In other words, if your grandma and/or her data was used in an experiment, either directly or indirectly, a simple English email must be sent to her that describes the experiment, the purpose, the control and the variables, as well as any placebos, and where she fell into all of it. A law like this would essentially break Metas current model and damage their revenue stream.

21

tinytooraph t1_itbtwrk wrote

Are the experiments critical to their ad revenue stream? I understand your position against them, but would requiring informed consent meaningfully change how they make money?

3

domino2064 t1_itbuzb8 wrote

Yes. Ad revenue is definitely their cash cow, but the social experimentation has been another major source of income, both in terms of data they can sell and data they could use to improve the impacts of their platform. They've been surprisingly open about some of the experiments, as they've had impacts on how their algorithms work, but even then, there's been little in the way of regulations let alone ethics.

And it isn't just Facebook - reddit has performed social experiments on its user base as well as other companies, except that, as for the experiments revealed to the public, Facebook has admitted to adversely impacting the livelihoods of large groups of users.

In one experiment that Andrew Marantz cited in his book, Anti-social: Online Extremists, Techno-Utopians, and the Hijacking of the American Conversation, Facebook intentionally subjected one user group to positive posts and news articles only and another to negative content. Those exposed to the negative content expressed emotional distress and evidence that their quality of life suffered at a worse rate than at the rate that the other group, exposed to positive content, saw their livelihoods improve. And it's thought that this is one of the more impactful experiments when it came to tuning the overall algorithm behind Facebooks news feed.

5

Cryowatt t1_itc35gu wrote

Calling it "the metaverse" over and over doesn't make it real. Zucc made a clone of second life that nobody asked for, that's it.

57

poop2live t1_itcrrdz wrote

Thank you for summarizing my thoughts on this. It's flabbergasting.

12

taci7c0ff33 t1_iterk55 wrote

MySpace clone goes 2.0, I mean it hilarious how ‘history repeats itself’ never seems to falter. Claiming to invent something thats already been invented. But if you ever had the unfortunate chance to be invited to interview at Facebook, and read their NDA/ ownership of everything you are and IP ownership of anything you are thinking about inventing… you can see how an org run by an innovation crushing culture void of “individuals” conceivably could imagine that they invent their own reality where “metaverse” is actually FBs idea and also that it’s actually worth investing truly inconceivable amounts of money. What a pit.

6

dotnetcowboy t1_itbo4il wrote

Like I said in a previous post, if anyone had more than a passing interest in “the metaverse”, Second Life would rule the world right now. They had better graphics than Zuck has now in 2010. AR and VR are interesting concepts for video games but it’s all very niche as a way of life. Go check out Second Life, you’ll see what I mean.

36

EyeLikeTheStonk t1_itbr3h2 wrote

Agreed,

I tried VR several times, it was cool but cool as in going on a roller coaster ride is cool.... As I don't see myself riding a coaster for hours at the time or every day of my life, the same applies to VR.

If you spent every day riding a roller coaster for hours, it would stop being cool...

Well VR is like that, once you experienced it for a bit, it loses its novelty appeal and the large headset becomes an annoyance, just like driving to the theme park to ride a coaster is an annoyance.

I see VR being useful for architecture, engineering and other jobs where "travelling" through a 3D mock up of your design can be interesting.

But the truth of everything is that computer screens work well enough that nobody is going to go through the trouble of wearing a VR headset.

10

aGoblinLife t1_itbrzpp wrote

Its good for exercise too, like beat saber and other games that encourage physical motion. Exploration games and parkour are pretty fun in it too.

Lots of traditional video game genres don't fit well into it though.

5

DarthBuzzard t1_itbue02 wrote

> Lots of traditional video game genres don't fit well into it though.

Which ones don't fit?

0

EyeLikeTheStonk t1_ite2dbb wrote

Any FPS that relies on precision and speed like Counter-Strike, COD, Fortnite, Overwatch, where precision aiming, spinning 180 degrees to shoot the guy behind you can be accomplished with a small movement of the mouse. Turning around in VR is a pain in the butt.

Any MOBA like League of Legends, Heroes of the Storm, DOTA 2, where precise movements on a map would not work in VR.

Most sports games like FIFA, NHL, NBA where players have an overhead view of the playing field are ill-suited for VR.

RTS games like Starcraft II, Age of Empires...

Most MMO games like World of Warcraft where having an wide field of view (hovering camera) is essential.

Any isometric platformer or longitudinal platform games.

Most Combat games like Smash, Street Fighter, Tekken, Mortal combat.

The best games for VR are :

  • Horror themed shooters where the point is to be afraid.
  • Exploration FPS like the Half Life series where problem solving is the point and where you do not get points for kills.
  • Simulators, like car racing, flight simulator, surgeon simulator and other "niche" simulator games.
3

DarthBuzzard t1_iteggxb wrote

> Any FPS that relies on precision and speed like Counter-Strike, COD, Fortnite, Overwatch, where precision aiming, spinning 180 degrees to shoot the guy behind you can be accomplished with a small movement of the mouse.

I'd agree that VR wouldn't be suited for this. Not sure if I'd classify that as a genre, but you are right that this gameplay can't be replicated (though you can still bring the franchises to VR).

MOBAs have been done in VR before, though as a 1st person experience. This could also be done with a top-down perspective, but of course it would feel different to control, like a mix of console-based MOBAs using a controller and having different gameplay mechanics that can be brought by the tracked controllers.

So you can't translate LoL exactly as it exists, but a spinoff could definitely be done. I'd actually appreciate a 3D overhead map I can easily look at and naturally zoom out/in to see more at once (only when units are revealed of course).

> Most sports games like FIFA, NHL, NBA where players have an overhead view of the playing field are ill-suited for VR.

> RTS games like Starcraft II, Age of Empires...

> Any isometric platformer or longitudinal platform games.

> Most Combat games like Smash, Street Fighter, Tekken, Mortal combat.

Overhead view works fine in VR. This could be great for the social aspect in RTS/Sports/Fighting games. Have two massive avatars sit on each side of the stadium / arena.

> Most MMO games like World of Warcraft where having an wide field of view (hovering camera) is essential.

That's merely just how 3rd person MMOs are designed, but nothing says that a VRMMO has to abide by that. Your field of view in VR, especially as headsets mature will be far higher than that of a console/PC 1st person game allowing you to not fall into the same pitfalls of a traditional 1st person MMO.

I'd also say VRMMOs have so much to gain over traditional MMOs that it might even be the default playstyle for the genre in the 2030s.

> The best games for VR are

> ... ... ...

> ... ... ...

> ... ... ...

Those are certainly some of the top genres, but I'd still say MMOs and RPGs or the two together stand to be some of the absolute best genres for VR when more games take advantage of these genres.

Platformers are also brilliant. Astro Bot as a 3rd person platformer is the highest rated PSVR game, and Stride shows how great Mirror's Edge 1st person style parkour works.

1

Lemonio t1_itfa841 wrote

If you think StarCraft could be done in VR that probably means you’ve never played StarCraft

2

aGoblinLife t1_itelm1d wrote

RE4 VR, minecraft VR, Skyrim VR, HL Alexa, the star wars beyond galaxy edge's, etc..

Basically immersive first person games work really well. The third person games like table top simulator VR and other top down ones are kinda gimmicky.

3rd person platformers with VR can be really cool especially if you can interact with the environment/characters with your hands.

I feel like FO76 could have a VR version and that'd be pretty dope for a MMO while the existing VR MMOs are kinda lame. I really want to see the graphic fidelity of UE5 games and the latest batch of AAAs like Fallen Order in VR.

1

DarthBuzzard t1_iter00t wrote

> I really want to see the graphic fidelity of UE5 games and the latest batch of AAAs like Fallen Order in VR.

You can actually play Fallen Order in VR with Praydog's mod, in 3rd person. It just feels like a more immersive way to play the game rather than something gimmicky.

1

dotnetcowboy t1_itc2hho wrote

Say something CoD or Battlefront where movement is key to the experience.

0

DarthBuzzard t1_itc2ntu wrote

I've played CoD maps in Pavlov, and there's a full Medal of Honor game in VR.

0

dotnetcowboy t1_itc42x3 wrote

And having to use the controls for movement didn’t distract from the experience? If I had to run in VR, I’d find it hard not to want to actually run.

0

DarthBuzzard t1_itc8cp6 wrote

I very much preferred it to regular CoD games. It didn't feel distracting.

0

mailslot t1_itd7o1k wrote

There was an odd period of interest for second life… lasting a week or two. A handful of companies announced that they were “moving in.” I think CNN had a virtual town hall. Retailers were exploring virtual shops.

It didn’t go well. I distinctly remember a live news cast interrupted by an obscenely modeled furry.

It’s almost like nobody had used second life before announcing that they were embracing it.

1

dotnetcowboy t1_itdvted wrote

Yeah, Second Life was the first promise of the metaverse circa 2008. Except back then everyone compared it to Snow Crash instead of Ready Player One.

1

The-Initiative t1_itbr5hx wrote

Imagine if all those resources were put to use on something useful, like curing disease or alternative energy research.

But avatars with legs are great too, I guess…

21

jonatton______yeah t1_itbwg2q wrote

That dickhead did put in loads of money to build a new ward at SF General Hospital (now named after him). I hate the guy and think he's a scourge on society, but he did do that.

8

mattsowa t1_itbzzol wrote

Performative philantropism deserves no recognition

3

No_Bullfrog5936 t1_itflmt6 wrote

Tf? Yes it does… money talks and if a hospital is built and patients are saved wtf matters if it’s performative or not.

Idiots

1

mattsowa t1_ith606g wrote

Iit's great that it happened. What's not great are the motives behind such performances. I don't think we're the idiots kiddo.

1

No_Bullfrog5936 t1_ithb72g wrote

I mean if you’re utilitarian it doesn’t matter… wild to me people wouldn’t recognize a hospital but for some reason intentions are really important.

So thoughts and prayers by a kind soul beats an actual hospital by a sociopath got it

1

mattsowa t1_ithbfpm wrote

I think you really need to learn some reading comprehension skills. I'd say it's about time

1

businessboyz t1_itc23ur wrote

Eh, don’t discount the hidden technological advancements that come along with the dumb consumer results like avatar legs.

The advancements in our understanding of mathematics/physics and it’s application in coding could have profound impacts in other aspects of the world.

5

VanillaElectrical331 t1_itcoeki wrote

I genuinely can't tell if you're being sarcastic...

−5

businessboyz t1_itcp0jy wrote

I’m not. Technology doesn’t advance in straightforward ways. Discoveries are often arising out of work completely unrelated to the original set out goal.

When we sent humans to the moon, we invented a whole lot of technology from the resulting lessons that had absolutely nothing to do with space. I don’t see why there wouldn’t be potential for technological advancements to come out of this metaverse initiative that ultimately have nothing to do with Meta’s virtual world.

4

JAKSeattle t1_itgmduq wrote

One example off the top of my head: Velcro! Invented to stick stuff on the wall and keep things from flying around inside the space capsule. Now available at every fabric and hardware store in your neighborhood!

1

aGoblinLife t1_itbse1m wrote

Not the same people, resources for entertainment are allocated based on consumer demand for it. If you're looking for a more top down allocation of resources then you're going to get shit results.

Should we invest more into medical and energy sectors over entertainment? Unclear.

−6

The-Initiative t1_itbsyt1 wrote

Metaverse is a mark z pet project. He could direct that money any way he chooses. Yeah, I get it’s a corporation, but if he wanted billions of meta resources devoted to building flying pogo sticks, they’d be working on that instead.

5

PerformerOwn194 t1_itbvpw3 wrote

Uh yeah probably

2

aGoblinLife t1_item0po wrote

Entertainment is the opiate of the masses, I feel like we'd be introducing instability to our society. As much as people say they want others to be motivated and productive, I'd like to remind you that some of the worst people in our history were motivated and productive.

−1

Playlanco t1_itbsqby wrote

Do people think Metaverse is a single app? That the metaverse fails or succeeds based on the performance of one app?

If not, do they expect all the various apps and services within the metaverse to magically succeed without failure?

I would imagine there would be plenty of failed endeavors in virtual reality. Especially in it's infancy.

Like the multiple dot.com and e-commerce crashes throughout the late 90's and early 2000's. There should be failed ideas, businesses, and services.

I have been in the IT industry professionally for a long time. I get these r/Technology suggested posts but honestly this subreddit does not feel like it has IT professionals in it.

12

DarthBuzzard t1_itbubqz wrote

> I get these r/Technology suggested posts but honestly this subreddit does not feel like it has IT professionals in it.

Correct. Most people in here are tech-illiterate, but they mask themselves as if they are somehow knowledgeable.

16

bkconn t1_itbu784 wrote

Some journalists also seem to think that if you don't like some technology or product that's coming out, you can just "cancel" it by continuously writing bad articles about how it needs to be stopped.

7

sheeshshosh t1_itbtbc9 wrote

>Do people think Metaverse is a single app?

I think people kind of expect the Metaverse, in its "ideal" form, to effectively be a single app, yeah. What's the point if it's just a hodgepodge of apps and platforms, like we have now, only viewed through a set of unwieldy goggles?

−2

Playlanco t1_itbv3up wrote

Being that the original meaning of the metaverse being basically the internet in virtual reality, yes it should be a hodgepodge of apps and services.

It seems people heard the word metaverse and think we will all live in virtual houses, walking virtual dogs, and shopping down virtual isles at supermarkets.

That's not the metaverse, that's a video game app for a virtual life. While there will be multiple games like this, it's not what the metaverse is.

The closet thing to the metaverse is Oculus Home (not Horizons), Steam VR, Windows Mixed Reality.

These platforms are in very early stages and mimic the dawn of internet services from AOL, Compuserve, Prodigy.

7

RandomMiddleName t1_itbxz48 wrote

Technology is so ubiquitous in daily life that non-IT professionals will want to learn more and have opinions. You could have wrote your comment to be informative, but instead you decided to be a dick. Hence why your profession has a reputation of lacking soft skills.

−6

foundafreeusername t1_itdgwf4 wrote

If you are genuinely interested I am working on a list to counter the misinformation here. Here is what the media (and most r/technology users) get wrong:

  • Many here are convinced the billions of $ are spent on a piece of VR software while in truth it is mostly research for novel hardware, AI and a platform to run other software ... To compare it to Apple: They are trying to build an entire new device category and ecosystem like the iPhone once did not just another mobile phone. Also note: This is a goal they want to reach not a product they are selling right now.

  • Most headline and articles use the word metaverse wrong. It isn't a piece of software. You can compare it to a web standard like HTML5. Once it exists it is suppose to allow all companies and developers to build VR/AR software that can interact with each other. It comes from the book Snow Crash. It is a virtual world that is accessed through a headset. Imagine it as a Holodeck from Star Trek.

  • A lot of users here got mislead thinking Meta's software has only 30 users. That article was about an entirely different attempt to build a "metaverse" by a crypto company.

  • and the legs: A lot users here seem to think Facebook can't figure out how to render legs under their avatar. In truth they are working on a new technology that can track your entire body while wearing a VR headset. Similar to Kinect but without any additional hardware. And remember: This needs to work for all possible VR experience not just their own software. An walking animation wouldn't do the job if someone else wants to play football in VR.

  • Are they just building another Second Life? There are some similarities but a lot of differences as well: Second Life is just piece software and controlled via mouse & keyboard. It was never very useful as a platform for other companies to create new products. If you build a football game in Second Life you create animations to interact with the ball and other players, you decide on the run speed of the characters, you map keys on your keyboard to specific actions to control your avatar and you see your own camera in third person. It is a lot of work. In a proper metaverse all need is to drop a ball and start playing with your friends. Everything that had to be manually done in Second Life is done automatically by the VR headset, body tracking and physics simulation.

Edit: still updating it

7

IceAgeMeetsRobots t1_itgx6yy wrote

>Hence why your profession has a reputation of lacking soft skills.

It's still one of the highest paying industries in the entire world. This industry has the most valuable companies in the entire world. Most people are technology illiterate when most of the modern world runs on said technology. It's not their fault people like you are stupid.

1

RandomMiddleName t1_itgz9w0 wrote

Spoken like a typical engineer who thinks everyone else is stupid and therefore talks down to them. Just because it’s a high paying job in a highly valued industry, doesn’t make the profession the top of the food chain.

1

IceAgeMeetsRobots t1_ith9owq wrote

The truth hurts. White collar workers in STEM, outside of celebrities and influencers, are at the top of the food chain.

1

DarthBuzzard t1_itc2csk wrote

> that non-IT professionals will want to learn more and have opinions.

Unfortunately that is rare on this subreddit. Most people that comment here have no intention to learn, because the majority of sources/statistics/studies that gets posted are disregarded and downvoted, with anecdotal opinions being the prevailing truth.

0

JalapenoJamm t1_itcdiot wrote

Any stats to back that up?

0

foundafreeusername t1_itdf1rm wrote

Just check out all metaverse posts ... It is really bad currently. Most users spread outright misinformation and the same people repeat it under every post.

2

_z_o t1_itcbdtp wrote

He is having some kind of psychiatric breakdown. Clearly delusional about the metaverse.

5

plopseven t1_itd8nqc wrote

We need to stop calling it “The MetaVerse” and start calling it “FaceBook’s MetaVerse.”

Dude is literally trying to take credit for the internet/VR and it’s blurring lines between innovation and rebranding an old concept.

3

grumpyfrench t1_itcfexo wrote

The best vr is the real world. Enjoy it

2

unlicensed_orifice t1_itcv95n wrote

It's not an investment if you're just throwing money at a dumpster fire.

2

monkale98 t1_itdnrqk wrote

i want someone to explain to me the purpose of the metavese, as envisioned by facebook. have work place meeting as an avatar? have digital art that goes away unless you drop in a token?

this is all a ploy to target a younger audience, we all know this.

the metaverse, the digital world that these dorks want cannot be built at this moment, it requires technologies yet to be made. you would essentially need the matrix plugs to combat the physical illness you get from having a VR headset on you. and then even if you had that, only the rich could afford it.

AR is probably the most feasible thing but even then, all that is proposed in the metaverse can be done by the phone in my pocket. only the VC fools that keep propping facebook can't realize this. really makes you wonder about the validity of those ivy league diplomas if they can keep getting suckered at every turn.

2

VadersSprinkledTits t1_ite583i wrote

Our only hope is that his shitty metaverse takes down Facebook completely. Most people can’t afford real food and housing, and this sociopath wants to sell virtual property lmao. Get fucked.

2

AutoModerator t1_itbl4ed wrote

WARNING! The link in question may require you to disable ad-blockers to see content. Though not required, please consider submitting an alternative source for this story.

WARNING! Disabling your ad blocker may open you up to malware infections, malicious cookies and can expose you to unwanted tracker networks. PROCEED WITH CAUTION.

Do not open any files which are automatically downloaded, and do not enter personal information on any page you do not trust. If you are concerned about tracking, consider opening the page in an incognito window, and verify that your browser is sending "do not track" requests.

IF YOU ENCOUNTER ANY MALWARE, MALICIOUS TRACKERS, CLICKJACKING, OR REDIRECT LOOPS PLEASE MESSAGE THE /r/technology MODERATORS IMMEDIATELY.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

1

PastTense1 t1_itc39vh wrote

While I don't know if the metaverse will succeed or fail one point to remember is that currently there is the expectation that successful new technologies will succeed instantly. But if you look at the historical record successful new technologies often took decades for success to happen.

1

dog_likes_chicken t1_itcq8x4 wrote

I might be being dumb, but how can metaverse be failing if it isn't out to the general public? Every week there's one of these doom stories about how Zucc is trying to force people out to use it. Even googling for metaverse just gives a bunch of news pieces about what it should be and the problems it faces, but nothing saying how to access it(not even of meta's corporate website).

I'd even expect there to be videos on youtube along the lines of "I tried metaverse and this was my experience" and the only videos I can find are the keynote where it was announced, or news pieces about what it will be.

1

DarthBuzzard t1_itcx5hd wrote

> I might be being dumb

You're not. You've caught on better than most, because you are right in that it doesn't yet exist and isn't meant to exist for years to come.

2

purple_hamster66 t1_itd8c4y wrote

The imaged applications are not about a VR Second Life rip off, or gaming at all. That’s just the demo — ignore it. The Metaverse is also about AR. Augmenting your vision affects you in your walk-around life, adding live captions that tell you the name of a person you’ve met before (but can’t recall where), adding walking navigation aids where GPS fails to locate you exactly (like malls, airports), and showing you which pan is still hot on the stove before you touch it. It might tell you — just by looking at them — that your kid has a temperature before he even starts whining, or when your plants need water, or the gluten content of food on your plate, or that you are about to drive over black ice and should slow down or steer around it. And (and this is very important for many wives) tells the husband where the Orange juice is in the fridge when he is looking straight at it, or finds his socks.

AR glasses can save lives, and make life more interesting, safe, and convenient. It can also inject unwanted ads into your life, which is why it’s considered such a valuable asset. But sometimes (rarely, for me), the ad presented shows exactly what you need, and with AI predicting behaviors, it might even become useful enough to pay the price for the intrusion. Ads are not FBs strength, however, many other companies are competing in this space, and the companies that offer the best advances with the least annoyances may win over FB.

1

Dan-in-Va t1_itdk04a wrote

The anti-meme stock. This will make a great movie one day, a comedy framed as a tragedy. The modern day Icarus.

1

OG_LiLi t1_ite9dl4 wrote

This is why normal people are confused by the metaverse and think Facebook owns it.

The product is not THE ‘metaverse, it’s a Metaverse made by Meta

This is disingenuous writing.

1

Pokeondese t1_itee49f wrote

This reminds me of when Nintendo introduced the virtual boy, right idea bad timing. Going to have to make something visually compelling, not just rebranding MMO games as “The Metaverse” with graphics that look like decade old wii sports characters.

1

konhaybay t1_itjubcu wrote

Does anyone remember Silicon Valley epi where they develop an AR game and insert ads, seems MV is going same route

1

bwoodski t1_itehiuk wrote

Man I hate articles like this. By most measures meta is doing really well. It sport super high margins, instagrams is still the most popular social media app and has only ever been getting more popular, sales in the oculus store are growing around 30% per year, oculus hardware sales are higher than any other competitor, people still advertise heavily on social media and user growth is growing really fast in developing markets.

The only thing people can point to in these articles is that horizon worlds is lagging which is a very small price of what meta is doing.

Like man, the data is there, just read more into it. I’d expect more from Forbes.

0

keklwords t1_itbw0zb wrote

Why do we let this motherfucker get away with shit that we all classify, completely unironically, as dystopian?

Is it because we’re all too brainwashed by all of the other bullshit this asshole has been force feeding us for years? Just too fucking lazy to actually do anything or give a shit? Or too fucking stupid to realize that all dystopian fictions likely would have begun with exactly this type of horseshit? Or too broken because we realize the real dystopia began with Facebook a couple decades ago?

−1

Bournvitta2022 t1_itbub6b wrote

It won't fails they may have to change approach but virtual/ augmented reality is the future.

−3