The metaverse is already here – it's Minecraft(clivethompson.medium.com)
clivethompson.medium.com
The metaverse is already here – it's Minecraft
https://clivethompson.medium.com/the-metaverse-is-already-here-its-minecraft-99c89ed8ba2
377 comments
I read a recent interview from mark zuck about the metaverse and someone asked him a similar question. He had an actually really insightful answer.
1) Most american adults watch several hours of TV per day. alternatively, many play a few hours of video games. (The actual per-person-per-day numbers are very high compared to the average 2hr/week i watch tv but whatever). Most of TV and Video Games are about ignoring reality for entertainment in a fake world already. thats a few hours people can dedicate.
2) The metaverse can be more than traditional video game type entertainment. WFH has turned the office as a destination into a keyboard/monitor as a destination. You can use VR to have a much more immersive/focused work destination than either office or WFH desk. Thats 8+ hours a day you can spend in metaverse.
(I have tried the Oculus workrooms and if the virtual screen resolution was higher then i'd personally work in it.)
1) Most american adults watch several hours of TV per day. alternatively, many play a few hours of video games. (The actual per-person-per-day numbers are very high compared to the average 2hr/week i watch tv but whatever). Most of TV and Video Games are about ignoring reality for entertainment in a fake world already. thats a few hours people can dedicate.
2) The metaverse can be more than traditional video game type entertainment. WFH has turned the office as a destination into a keyboard/monitor as a destination. You can use VR to have a much more immersive/focused work destination than either office or WFH desk. Thats 8+ hours a day you can spend in metaverse.
(I have tried the Oculus workrooms and if the virtual screen resolution was higher then i'd personally work in it.)
I'm frustrated that everywhere I look I keep seeing "metaverse" and "VR" used interchangeably. All of the things described above are VR, and none of them are the metaverse.
Watching TV or playing a game in an immersive, distraction-free VR environment sounds great, and will happen, and it's not the metaverse, it's just VR.
Working in a virtual home office has the potential to be extremely productive, ergonomic, and space-saving, and it's not the metaverse, it's just VR.
A metaverse involves some kind of shared space and shared experience across a networked medium. Not only is it more than just doing things in VR, a metaverse doesn't even require VR.
Watching TV or playing a game in an immersive, distraction-free VR environment sounds great, and will happen, and it's not the metaverse, it's just VR.
Working in a virtual home office has the potential to be extremely productive, ergonomic, and space-saving, and it's not the metaverse, it's just VR.
A metaverse involves some kind of shared space and shared experience across a networked medium. Not only is it more than just doing things in VR, a metaverse doesn't even require VR.
Frankly the problem is, none of these are really well defined. I think Zuck wants the general consensus to lean towards:
VR - Is a user interface. Metaverse is a network built for that user interface.
Historically, we had screen and keyboard based user interfaces, and with it text based gaming like Zork. Then we had screen and controller based user interfaces, and with it games like Pong. At a certain point we got the screen and mouse user interface, and with it FPS, RTS, like Warcraft and Doom. Touch screens were again a new user interface and with it came games like Fruit Ninja. VR now exists as a user interface (although still needs to be improved) and many people love playing Skyrim with it, or Beat Saber.
All of these were mostly local experiences with different (better?) user interfaces.
Meanwhile, each user interface had its own networks that were built on them. e.g. Email is a "first class network" built on the text based user interface. e.g. WWW is a "first class network" built on the mouse based user interface.
The metaverse isn't a new user interface. The metaverse is a "first class network" built on top of the VR based user interface.
VR - Is a user interface. Metaverse is a network built for that user interface.
Historically, we had screen and keyboard based user interfaces, and with it text based gaming like Zork. Then we had screen and controller based user interfaces, and with it games like Pong. At a certain point we got the screen and mouse user interface, and with it FPS, RTS, like Warcraft and Doom. Touch screens were again a new user interface and with it came games like Fruit Ninja. VR now exists as a user interface (although still needs to be improved) and many people love playing Skyrim with it, or Beat Saber.
All of these were mostly local experiences with different (better?) user interfaces.
Meanwhile, each user interface had its own networks that were built on them. e.g. Email is a "first class network" built on the text based user interface. e.g. WWW is a "first class network" built on the mouse based user interface.
The metaverse isn't a new user interface. The metaverse is a "first class network" built on top of the VR based user interface.
The issue is VR is in practice a really terrible interface for widespread shared user experiences. MMO’s are almost exclusively played in 3rd person perspective in part because looking at eye level prevents you from seeing behind the person in front of you, and removing collision detection doesn’t help. Think of walking around a crowded convention and you really can’t see many people at the same time. You can of course swap perspectives with VR, but face to avatar conversations don’t add much. Their missing out on facial expressions so in practice it’s mostly just shared voice chat with a tiny percentage of body language.
The only thing linking metaverse and VR is basic buzzword bingo, they don’t gain anything from being linked.
The only thing linking metaverse and VR is basic buzzword bingo, they don’t gain anything from being linked.
> MMO’s are almost exclusively played in 3rd person perspective in part because looking at eye level prevents you from seeing behind the person in front of you
I mean, yes I agree. There are some workarounds, i.e. you could jump, in VR it’s very fast to swivel your head, look around the people in front of you or look behind you.
That said, I very much agree, I wouldn’t want to play WOW in VR. The DBM style warning zones on the ground alone would kill the UX. Meanwhile, as a HPally, I played WOW primarily in 2D :)(specifically raid frames). I’m very certain I would continue to play VR WOW in 2D as well. Some sort of console attached to my arm or floating in front of me to 1. See who has my beacon/buffs/debuffs 2. Quickly chose targets to spot heal or cure.
However, I’m very excited to try the second big VR-first MMO (basically the WOW not the EverQuest) built exclusively for VR!!!
Maybe, it’s a lot more skill shots, maybe it’s more aoe heals. I can’t even imagine how spot heals or cures would be targeted. Maybe it would feel like being a QB and Id need to literally throw Madden style spirals to land my spot heals??? THAT COULD BE SICK (although that skill floor/cap might be too high to balance boss fights well).
I’m not smart enough to predict the actual implementation. But I know there is enough money to be made that someones will iteratively make it happen.
I mean, yes I agree. There are some workarounds, i.e. you could jump, in VR it’s very fast to swivel your head, look around the people in front of you or look behind you.
That said, I very much agree, I wouldn’t want to play WOW in VR. The DBM style warning zones on the ground alone would kill the UX. Meanwhile, as a HPally, I played WOW primarily in 2D :)(specifically raid frames). I’m very certain I would continue to play VR WOW in 2D as well. Some sort of console attached to my arm or floating in front of me to 1. See who has my beacon/buffs/debuffs 2. Quickly chose targets to spot heal or cure.
However, I’m very excited to try the second big VR-first MMO (basically the WOW not the EverQuest) built exclusively for VR!!!
Maybe, it’s a lot more skill shots, maybe it’s more aoe heals. I can’t even imagine how spot heals or cures would be targeted. Maybe it would feel like being a QB and Id need to literally throw Madden style spirals to land my spot heals??? THAT COULD BE SICK (although that skill floor/cap might be too high to balance boss fights well).
I’m not smart enough to predict the actual implementation. But I know there is enough money to be made that someones will iteratively make it happen.
In a metaverse, you could put a 3rd person perspective with a higher vantage point on the character's arm/wrist display and use it to navigate.
There’s no physics. You can make everyone’s eye-level a few inches above the place their head is rendered for the rest. So everyone is just a bit taller than everyone else. Simultaneously
> missing out on facial expressions
Give it a few years and every new VR headset will have facial expression sensors.
Give it a few years and every new VR headset will have facial expression sensors.
VR brings limitations and capabilities like any other mode of interaction. Mobile games don't play well on PC and PC games don't play well on mobile.
I'm sure some clever folks will find a way to build a MMO that works for VR. Maybe characters will have magical x-ray glasses that renders other characters semi-transparent, so they can look through the crowd? Perhaps VR MMO games will be grander in spatial scale with lots of small towns to limit players clumping together city centres. Maybe, trying to find something in a crowded marketplace with lots of distractions, could be a part of the quest?
I'm sure some clever folks will find a way to build a MMO that works for VR. Maybe characters will have magical x-ray glasses that renders other characters semi-transparent, so they can look through the crowd? Perhaps VR MMO games will be grander in spatial scale with lots of small towns to limit players clumping together city centres. Maybe, trying to find something in a crowded marketplace with lots of distractions, could be a part of the quest?
but you need to realize what is possible today will not be the same as what will be available 10 or 20 years down to road with so much dollars pouring into research from all these big corporations/governments around the world.
Plenty of "metaversy" things are possible today, but rejected by users.
Second Life is a tiny niche. Connecting Minecraft servers with portals has been possible for ages, and smooth connections seems like it wouldn't be terribly difficult, yet no one uses it because no one wants it.
And despite the huge increases in VR quality that has happened already, none of this has changed.
You suggest it's because the VR isn't good enough yet, but I think the evidence so far suggests VR is not the missing ingredient for people to want to live in a common virtual world.
Second Life is a tiny niche. Connecting Minecraft servers with portals has been possible for ages, and smooth connections seems like it wouldn't be terribly difficult, yet no one uses it because no one wants it.
And despite the huge increases in VR quality that has happened already, none of this has changed.
You suggest it's because the VR isn't good enough yet, but I think the evidence so far suggests VR is not the missing ingredient for people to want to live in a common virtual world.
> Plenty of "metaversy" things are possible today, but rejected by users.
While I agree with you on this; online dating was seen as something only desperate people would do, until it was for everyone.
While I agree with you on this; online dating was seen as something only desperate people would do, until it was for everyone.
[deleted]
> Not only is it more than just doing things in VR, a metaverse doesn't even require VR.
I'm sorry, I think if you want to broaden this term like this you're going to have to stipulate some new boundaries. Else, we've got the metaverse: it's just the internet, and metaverse is just the latest in a long line of silly names for it back to the "internet superhighway".
And when Di died or 9/11 happened I had a "shared experience across a networked medium" about them, for concrete examples.
Metaverse comes from Snowcrash, and there it was... very unquestionably a VR experience as far as I can remember? So I'm not sure where this idea even comes from.
I'm sorry, I think if you want to broaden this term like this you're going to have to stipulate some new boundaries. Else, we've got the metaverse: it's just the internet, and metaverse is just the latest in a long line of silly names for it back to the "internet superhighway".
And when Di died or 9/11 happened I had a "shared experience across a networked medium" about them, for concrete examples.
Metaverse comes from Snowcrash, and there it was... very unquestionably a VR experience as far as I can remember? So I'm not sure where this idea even comes from.
> Else, we've got the metaverse: it's just the internet, and metaverse is just the latest in a long line of silly names for it back to the "internet superhighway".
Yes, this is absolutely correct.
A "metaverse" exists in contrast to meatspace. In meatspace I walk down the street, I look through a shop window, I see you browsing inside, I spray some graffiti on the wall, you see the graffiti when you come out of the shop. We have a shared space with the qualities of presence (I passively saw you while you were browsing) and persistence (the graffiti will be there for anyone to see).
In the metaverse, I open some application on a computer, I look at some window or readout, I see that you're online (maybe I just see a light next to a username, or maybe I see your WoW character dancing shirtless outside of Goldshire), I leave something persistent (maybe a comment on a blog post, maybe a spray on the wall in an MMOFPS), which is available for you to see at some point. There are hundreds of metaverses (that's nearly the whole point; a metaverse is a virtual space that isn't bound by the rules and limits of physical space, so why not inhabit a few dozen?) of varying complexity (many websites, IRC, BBSes) and immersiveness (Minecraft, Second Life, PlayStation Home). VR isn't intrinsic to the idea of a metaverse, it's just one potential realization of the idea.
> Metaverse comes from Snowcrash, and there it was... very unquestionably a VR experience as far as I can remember?
Stephenson depicted his metaverse as a virtual space for the sake of the reader's imagination, so that they could envision something real and familiar instead of just a bunch of people clacking away on keyboards. The "virtual street" metaphor used in Snow Crash was always just a convenient literary device, and not at all the point of the metaverse, which to reiterate is the idea of a virtual shared universe in which to exist that is unbound from the restrictions of the physical universe.
Yes, this is absolutely correct.
A "metaverse" exists in contrast to meatspace. In meatspace I walk down the street, I look through a shop window, I see you browsing inside, I spray some graffiti on the wall, you see the graffiti when you come out of the shop. We have a shared space with the qualities of presence (I passively saw you while you were browsing) and persistence (the graffiti will be there for anyone to see).
In the metaverse, I open some application on a computer, I look at some window or readout, I see that you're online (maybe I just see a light next to a username, or maybe I see your WoW character dancing shirtless outside of Goldshire), I leave something persistent (maybe a comment on a blog post, maybe a spray on the wall in an MMOFPS), which is available for you to see at some point. There are hundreds of metaverses (that's nearly the whole point; a metaverse is a virtual space that isn't bound by the rules and limits of physical space, so why not inhabit a few dozen?) of varying complexity (many websites, IRC, BBSes) and immersiveness (Minecraft, Second Life, PlayStation Home). VR isn't intrinsic to the idea of a metaverse, it's just one potential realization of the idea.
> Metaverse comes from Snowcrash, and there it was... very unquestionably a VR experience as far as I can remember?
Stephenson depicted his metaverse as a virtual space for the sake of the reader's imagination, so that they could envision something real and familiar instead of just a bunch of people clacking away on keyboards. The "virtual street" metaphor used in Snow Crash was always just a convenient literary device, and not at all the point of the metaverse, which to reiterate is the idea of a virtual shared universe in which to exist that is unbound from the restrictions of the physical universe.
The depiction was as relevant to the WWW as the browser is: the presentation is up to the client, remember that Lynx and Firefox are both perfectly good web clients (in principle, we've killed that aspect of the web for the most part by insisting on pixel perfect copies instead of broad rendering hints). But depending on bandwidth and rendering capability of your device you could have the entirety of the gamma ranging from text-only all the way to full immersive 3D and everything in between.
You have the right take here - the Metaverse is basically the internet with a Z axis in the DOM - and anyone is free to do with that as they may.
Its been around for longer than Second Life in pancake kvm forms but the latest iteration is based on Immersion or Embodied experience facilitated by the new hardware price/performance advances.
VR hardware is just about over the chasm and proper wide fov AR is on the horizon although semi AR/MR is possible today (e.g. Pokemon Go as a shared overlay of digital world space on to a shared real world space).
The Immersive Embodied Metaverse is available over the internet using open W3C WebXR standards today and this will get better as the space and infrastructure matures.
Its been around for longer than Second Life in pancake kvm forms but the latest iteration is based on Immersion or Embodied experience facilitated by the new hardware price/performance advances.
VR hardware is just about over the chasm and proper wide fov AR is on the horizon although semi AR/MR is possible today (e.g. Pokemon Go as a shared overlay of digital world space on to a shared real world space).
The Immersive Embodied Metaverse is available over the internet using open W3C WebXR standards today and this will get better as the space and infrastructure matures.
“The internet with a Z axis in the DOM” doesn’t really make sense when you consider that the DOM already has a Z axis, and it’s a web thing not an internet thing.
Incidentally, those of us old enough may remember the number of websites having "streets" and "neighbourhoods" in the 90s while people were still trying to figure out how to translate things from offline to online.
Virtual shopping malls where you would "walk" around by clicking around websites.
Virtual shopping malls where you would "walk" around by clicking around websites.
I think metaverse is just a fancy name for communicating with people online supported by technology (both present technology, future technology and meatspace communications supported by technology).
It’s clear from Facebook’s presentations for instance that they consider text messaging via WhatsApp to class as part of the metaverse.
It’s not anything new, but I think the metaverse strategy is basically Facebook saying “we want to own all communications, and push the boundaries of what owning communications even means”. That’s my take anyway, but I have found most people are focused on the VR aspect and have missed the more scary all-encompassing and broader definition.
It’s clear from Facebook’s presentations for instance that they consider text messaging via WhatsApp to class as part of the metaverse.
It’s not anything new, but I think the metaverse strategy is basically Facebook saying “we want to own all communications, and push the boundaries of what owning communications even means”. That’s my take anyway, but I have found most people are focused on the VR aspect and have missed the more scary all-encompassing and broader definition.
Yeah. We still need to see how Facebook/Meta wants to materialize this.
Maybe they want to break the boundaries between your real self (as you consume apps like WhatsApp and Instagram), your social profile (true self in virtual world like the closed garden in Facebook) and the avatar in a world like Second Life. This would be a gold mine, because they already can target ads to you in the real world, so they could do it there too. Doing it were the people use fake avatars is not so easy.
So think that every user is an inhabitant, a citizen, a potential buyer in the virtual and the real world, but also a potential business owner in the virtual world. Business owners will be tax payers that must pay fees to operate on this city-state that will have internal laws that except for few cases (at most) will not be subject to government laws and constitutional protection, and if you are difficult or problematic the authority will be able to expatriate you without prior notice, regardless of time or money invested in the platform. Maybe, at most, they could offer arbitration with a company that knows that if they don't favor Meta the contract will not be renewed. So yeah. It is a good idea, if they can pull it.
So think that every user is an inhabitant, a citizen, a potential buyer in the virtual and the real world, but also a potential business owner in the virtual world. Business owners will be tax payers that must pay fees to operate on this city-state that will have internal laws that except for few cases (at most) will not be subject to government laws and constitutional protection, and if you are difficult or problematic the authority will be able to expatriate you without prior notice, regardless of time or money invested in the platform. Maybe, at most, they could offer arbitration with a company that knows that if they don't favor Meta the contract will not be renewed. So yeah. It is a good idea, if they can pull it.
I would classify it as slightly more than communication; a metaverse also has to give you some way to "inhabit" it. We're communicating on HN, but HN doesn't really have a way to inhabit it, so I wouldn't call HN a metaverse.
Every registered user is an inhabitant, every passerby an observing alien that might convert into an inhabitant at some point.
[deleted]
This was my understanding as well. In many ways, it feels like the "metaverse" is already here and has been for a while, it's mostly Facebook and their ancillary apps + Twitter for me.
> Metaverse comes from Snowcrash, and there it was... very unquestionably a VR experience as far as I can remember?
There was a two dimensional interface called Flatland that worked like a CLI. Hiro used it to manipulate the virus without viewing it.
There was a two dimensional interface called Flatland that worked like a CLI. Hiro used it to manipulate the virus without viewing it.
[deleted]
I see a lot of assumptions about office worker productivity with zero real world evidence.
A lot of home office workers never learned to touch type. How the heck are they supposed to do office work if they can't see their fingers on the keyboard? Voice recognition is no solution, it still sucks for text entry and is completely useless for anything like slide presentations or spreadsheets.
There is legitimate potential for workers doing 3D stuff like CAD, architecture, and data visualization but that's a tiny niche of the workforce.
A lot of home office workers never learned to touch type. How the heck are they supposed to do office work if they can't see their fingers on the keyboard? Voice recognition is no solution, it still sucks for text entry and is completely useless for anything like slide presentations or spreadsheets.
There is legitimate potential for workers doing 3D stuff like CAD, architecture, and data visualization but that's a tiny niche of the workforce.
Like others said, occluding the keyboard into VR is suprisingly capable, especially when combined with touch typing.
Also most CAD users would probably not want cludgy UI like VR has today, they want keyboard and mouse too.
I suggest looking at the demo/videos of Horizon Workspace (by meta). It works really well, although the resolution is too low for me tooday.
Then there is this guy that was on HN recently:
https://blog.immersed.team/working-from-orbit-39bf95a6d385
Also most CAD users would probably not want cludgy UI like VR has today, they want keyboard and mouse too.
I suggest looking at the demo/videos of Horizon Workspace (by meta). It works really well, although the resolution is too low for me tooday.
Then there is this guy that was on HN recently:
https://blog.immersed.team/working-from-orbit-39bf95a6d385
> How the heck are they supposed to do office work if they can't see their fingers on the keyboard?
I have seen a video, IIRC it was from SimulaVR, in which the user had a virtual window which showed a camera view facing the real-world keyboard. So this is easy to solve: these people who need to see their fingers on the keyboard (and probably everyone else when doing a real-world action like getting a cup with a drink) would open a window with an external camera view.
I have seen a video, IIRC it was from SimulaVR, in which the user had a virtual window which showed a camera view facing the real-world keyboard. So this is easy to solve: these people who need to see their fingers on the keyboard (and probably everyone else when doing a real-world action like getting a cup with a drink) would open a window with an external camera view.
You’ll be able to see your fingers and arms and keyboard/mouse/trackpd/desk surface/chair all in vr. Even current gen oculus has a front facing camera.
[deleted]
How is touch typing (or lack of it) related to working in a home office?
Most office work that I’ve seen requires text entry (email, spreadsheets, proposals, etc) and that’s always today done through a keyboard. Doing that work in VR where you can’t see the keyboard is surprisingly tough, even if you can touch type!
I’ve switched out my keycaps for blanks recently to try to force myself to get better at working in VR but I’m still struggling a bit with all the symbols.
I’ve switched out my keycaps for blanks recently to try to force myself to get better at working in VR but I’m still struggling a bit with all the symbols.
Luckily, tracking your physical keyboard in VR has already been a thing for a while, and it has both quite solid third-party[0] and first-party implementations[1] by now.
To clarify, when I say "tracking", I don't mean just being able to use your keyboard in VR. I mean being able to actually see your keyboard in VR, along with being able to see keycaps on the virtual representation of your keyboard.
0. https://uploadvr.com/immersed-real-keyboard-support/
1. https://www.cnet.com/tech/gaming/typing-in-vr-how-to-connect...
To clarify, when I say "tracking", I don't mean just being able to use your keyboard in VR. I mean being able to actually see your keyboard in VR, along with being able to see keycaps on the virtual representation of your keyboard.
0. https://uploadvr.com/immersed-real-keyboard-support/
1. https://www.cnet.com/tech/gaming/typing-in-vr-how-to-connect...
Bringing physical keyboards and other peripherals into VR is just a matter of time though. There’s already a lot of experiments doing exactly that.
When I was in college with a time-sharing system, someone as a joke removed all the keycaps from one of the CRTs. Didn't stop me, I'm a good enough touch typist that I just sat down and started using it.
Good typing skills are a super-power in today's world.
These days in Teams it will tell you when someone's typing. It amazes me how long people need to type just to get a simple point across.
Good typing skills are a super-power in today's world.
These days in Teams it will tell you when someone's typing. It amazes me how long people need to type just to get a simple point across.
Why can't you have printed keycaps in VR?
I switched out keycaps IRL, not in VR. The idea was that, not being able to cheat by looking down would help improve my typing faster by forcing me to memorize the keys better. I’ve only gone from mid-50s wpm to now about 60ish but it’s helped more with the uncommon keys that don’t move the average as much. It’s those uncommon keys that kill me in VR though so it feels like a bigger bump.
about 20 years ago I was using the kde application Ktouch to learn touch typing.. it was highly effective compared to the competition of the time. Give it a try!
But why does it matter if you "cheat"? That makes no sense. If you can type 95 wpm using keys with letters on them, then that's all that matters. Your goal is to be able to type effectively, not to type with a handicap.
I think part of the plan is to build VR spaces and then connect them together. Take the "things" in that space and expose them to non-vr software clients.
eg. maybe your vr home has digital art, but that art can also exist and be viewed in other mediums. Or you can all sit at home and watch VRTV with friends, but one friend just watches on their phone on the bus.
Or a virtaul office desk, that can have coworkers visiting. The office server can be hosted on your corp servers (or, the social networking, maybe you self host your personal office), but when you leave to go virtually home, you're now in your home, hosted by fb nee meta.
eg. maybe your vr home has digital art, but that art can also exist and be viewed in other mediums. Or you can all sit at home and watch VRTV with friends, but one friend just watches on their phone on the bus.
Or a virtaul office desk, that can have coworkers visiting. The office server can be hosted on your corp servers (or, the social networking, maybe you self host your personal office), but when you leave to go virtually home, you're now in your home, hosted by fb nee meta.
Absolutely, the idea of a shared virtual office (as opposed to just a solitary home office) would be a realization of a VR metaverse. Of course, aside from meetings (where the whole point is to interact with other people), I think it remains to be seen whether the idea of a shared virtual office is actually something that anyone really wants, or whether it's simply a case of a lack of imagination from people who are so accustomed to the idea of shared office space that they try to shoehorn it into the virtual world without really considering if it makes sense to. Personally, if I'm going to be working in a virtual space, I'm going to be working somewhere in Earth's orbit, or under a tree on a hill on a rainy evening surrounded by fireflies, and not in a 3D-rendered cubicle.
> Not only is it more than just doing things in VR, a metaverse doesn't even require VR.
It does not matter because for the public and the media Zuckerberg is redefining the meaning of the word right in front of our eyes. Give it a few years and everybody will believe VR is an inherent feature of metaverse. Just like those of us who had been using the word "crypto" to mean "cryptography" for decades were trying to explain in vain what the word originally mean - but it made no sense as the new meaning was already popularized.
It does not matter because for the public and the media Zuckerberg is redefining the meaning of the word right in front of our eyes. Give it a few years and everybody will believe VR is an inherent feature of metaverse. Just like those of us who had been using the word "crypto" to mean "cryptography" for decades were trying to explain in vain what the word originally mean - but it made no sense as the new meaning was already popularized.
Arguably that's probably why Facebook's efforts are doomed to fail before they've even started. By branding and marketing and tying all of their "metaverse" activities to VR they've already lost in a lot of user mindset. The retrending blog post on the Requiem for the HMD [1][2] is more than enough reason to believe that VR (at it exists today, as it existed in 2019 when that blog post was written) is an albatross that Facebook has now tied around its neck as Meta.
People are already dismissing this "metaverse" furor as just more VR hype with a stupider name and the company "Meta" is risking killing the entire term "metaverse" and any usefulness it might have had altogether.
Ironically, by owning Facebook "Meta" should be in one of the best positions to build/sell a 2D "metaverse plane" as well as just about anyone else possibly could. Tear down some of the garden walls, allow a bit more of the old MySpace and Blog anarchy of clashing styles and user control, be a better web citizen. They aren't likely to do that because they are using "metaverse" as attempt to make more Oculus money and risking the Facebook lock in and walled garden for a vision with actual guts and takes risks doesn't seem to be in their interest.
[1] https://www.highfidelity.com/backlog/requiem-for-the-hmd
[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29069381
People are already dismissing this "metaverse" furor as just more VR hype with a stupider name and the company "Meta" is risking killing the entire term "metaverse" and any usefulness it might have had altogether.
Ironically, by owning Facebook "Meta" should be in one of the best positions to build/sell a 2D "metaverse plane" as well as just about anyone else possibly could. Tear down some of the garden walls, allow a bit more of the old MySpace and Blog anarchy of clashing styles and user control, be a better web citizen. They aren't likely to do that because they are using "metaverse" as attempt to make more Oculus money and risking the Facebook lock in and walled garden for a vision with actual guts and takes risks doesn't seem to be in their interest.
[1] https://www.highfidelity.com/backlog/requiem-for-the-hmd
[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29069381
That Requiem for the HMD article has not aged well. All of those issues are a matter of iterative improvements over what we have today, and the devices will be ready for mass adoption.
Have you seen the leaked Quest Pro design[1]? It's already close to being ski goggle size, and it's only a couple of generations away from something the size of sunglasses.
Displays are getting cheaper, better and higher resolution. UX is being improved, passthrough cameras already exist.
My estimate is that towards the end of this decade we'll see unprecedented adoption of VR/AR outside of the few niche use cases we see today.
Meta is jumping on the bandwagon early, making their brand synonymous with VR, and betting big that this will change how everyone uses computers today, and that it will be the tech to replace smartphones.
As much as I dislike that such a user hostile company is trying to popularize the metaverse/VR, I'm sure they did their research and are confident this will eventually sell like crazy. I think they're right.
[1]: https://nitter.eu/basti564/status/1452366495053488135
Have you seen the leaked Quest Pro design[1]? It's already close to being ski goggle size, and it's only a couple of generations away from something the size of sunglasses.
Displays are getting cheaper, better and higher resolution. UX is being improved, passthrough cameras already exist.
My estimate is that towards the end of this decade we'll see unprecedented adoption of VR/AR outside of the few niche use cases we see today.
Meta is jumping on the bandwagon early, making their brand synonymous with VR, and betting big that this will change how everyone uses computers today, and that it will be the tech to replace smartphones.
As much as I dislike that such a user hostile company is trying to popularize the metaverse/VR, I'm sure they did their research and are confident this will eventually sell like crazy. I think they're right.
[1]: https://nitter.eu/basti564/status/1452366495053488135
Right now the public perception remains that "good" VR/AR headsets are always five years away, since the 1990s.
Whether or not they did their research, whether or not we are just a few iterative improvements away from mass adoption, there's still just too much feeling of "same hype cycle, different day" from the average consumer (which is the point of that article, and my implication that VR is dead right now but it was Facebook's lucky albatross so they're tying it around their necks in the hopes it is still lucky while dead [1]).
[1] Spoiler alert for a classic poem used as a metaphor here: in the poem things do not go well from here. I am pessimistic about this marketing play for "Meta".
Whether or not they did their research, whether or not we are just a few iterative improvements away from mass adoption, there's still just too much feeling of "same hype cycle, different day" from the average consumer (which is the point of that article, and my implication that VR is dead right now but it was Facebook's lucky albatross so they're tying it around their necks in the hopes it is still lucky while dead [1]).
[1] Spoiler alert for a classic poem used as a metaphor here: in the poem things do not go well from here. I am pessimistic about this marketing play for "Meta".
> Tear down some of the garden walls,
They used to be open. Cambridge Analytica came along and congress made them decide open was a liability. Sure they were starting to close down before congress, but now they're sure as hell not opening up.
They used to be open. Cambridge Analytica came along and congress made them decide open was a liability. Sure they were starting to close down before congress, but now they're sure as hell not opening up.
That's not the garden walls to which I refer. I remember trying to program against Facebook even in the pre-Cambridge Analytica days. Sure the APIs had way more data, but it was all still siloed in that only apps that Facebook "vetted" were allowed in, and they were always strict about the CSS and components you were allowed to use and tight on the ways you were allowed to link people outside of Facebook itself.
I don't care if the data is locked down or not, the social graph isn't the interesting part of a "metaverse" and in some ways it is probably better locked up and that can remain Facebook's lock in to keep them interested in the project. The kind of garden walls I was talking about are more federative: bringing external content in, but in ways that are true to the outside content; not just confined to Facebook looks and styles and components, not confined to a bare amount of customization of boring card styles, not embedded in a "Facebook way" but in a "web way" (whatever that means, and it doesn't really feel like it means much at all after the imagination and wilds of the 1990s).
I referenced the anarchy and chaos of blogs and MySpace, specifically: it's about user control to "do ugly things", to escape the gray walls and graffiti "their spaces". If Facebook is a "space" today, it's a building full of cubicles all alike. Sure, you can hang photos in the cubicles and they've got colorful stock ones, but your still constrained to just those cubicle walls and they mandate a lot about the allowed size and frame styles. That's almost directly the antithesis of a user owned "metaverse" whether 2D or 3D.
I don't care if the data is locked down or not, the social graph isn't the interesting part of a "metaverse" and in some ways it is probably better locked up and that can remain Facebook's lock in to keep them interested in the project. The kind of garden walls I was talking about are more federative: bringing external content in, but in ways that are true to the outside content; not just confined to Facebook looks and styles and components, not confined to a bare amount of customization of boring card styles, not embedded in a "Facebook way" but in a "web way" (whatever that means, and it doesn't really feel like it means much at all after the imagination and wilds of the 1990s).
I referenced the anarchy and chaos of blogs and MySpace, specifically: it's about user control to "do ugly things", to escape the gray walls and graffiti "their spaces". If Facebook is a "space" today, it's a building full of cubicles all alike. Sure, you can hang photos in the cubicles and they've got colorful stock ones, but your still constrained to just those cubicle walls and they mandate a lot about the allowed size and frame styles. That's almost directly the antithesis of a user owned "metaverse" whether 2D or 3D.
The fact that the definition of the "metaverse" is stipulating so much disagreement and discussion is itself the problem.
When smartphones were launched there was a simple description - "oh cool, it's a traditional phone but it has a computer running inside of it? makes sense"
When smartphones were launched there was a simple description - "oh cool, it's a traditional phone but it has a computer running inside of it? makes sense"
Not a problem. An opportunity.
It took a decade from the first smartphones until iPhone/Android like devices with a mostly uniform appearance and UI had decisively won, though. There was a lot of rapid exploration of design space first.
As for VR/metaverse, there's been constant exploration of this space for decades. The VR boom in the 90s was killed by cost and primitive hardware, but we still have surviving persistent 3d worlds that came out of that wave.
We've also seen a lot of non-VR exploration. Aside from Minecraft, we have Roblox, which while a lot more limited in some ways is also a lot more meta: you have an identity that persists across worlds, with a social layer across that. Minecraft looks to be slowly moving in that direction.
We'll see people exploring a lot of other variants, and most will fail. But in the process we'll start to learn what will work.
I doubt Facebook, or Minecraft/Microsoft, or Apple, or Google will turn out to be the winner though.
Maybe they'll manage to buy the winner.
It took a decade from the first smartphones until iPhone/Android like devices with a mostly uniform appearance and UI had decisively won, though. There was a lot of rapid exploration of design space first.
As for VR/metaverse, there's been constant exploration of this space for decades. The VR boom in the 90s was killed by cost and primitive hardware, but we still have surviving persistent 3d worlds that came out of that wave.
We've also seen a lot of non-VR exploration. Aside from Minecraft, we have Roblox, which while a lot more limited in some ways is also a lot more meta: you have an identity that persists across worlds, with a social layer across that. Minecraft looks to be slowly moving in that direction.
We'll see people exploring a lot of other variants, and most will fail. But in the process we'll start to learn what will work.
I doubt Facebook, or Minecraft/Microsoft, or Apple, or Google will turn out to be the winner though.
Maybe they'll manage to buy the winner.
This here. How kids use roblox is fantastic to see, they play in worlds they build themselves and share them.
I'd say that this is closer to when "the cloud" came about. No one was quite sure what it was, but everyone wanted in.
To quote (some) of Larry Ellisons famous statements about it:
"The interesting thing about cloud computing is that we’ve redefined cloud computing to include everything that we already do. … The computer industry is the only industry that is more fashion-driven than women’s fashion."
"Maybe I’m an idiot, but I have no idea what anyone is talking about. What is it? It’s complete gibberish. It’s insane. When is this idiocy going to stop?"
To quote (some) of Larry Ellisons famous statements about it:
"The interesting thing about cloud computing is that we’ve redefined cloud computing to include everything that we already do. … The computer industry is the only industry that is more fashion-driven than women’s fashion."
"Maybe I’m an idiot, but I have no idea what anyone is talking about. What is it? It’s complete gibberish. It’s insane. When is this idiocy going to stop?"
It's funny, all I hear now is, "I don't understand it, so it must be useless"
And "the cloud" as a phrase was/is indeed useless to those who want to know how things work.
The point of "the cloud" was the concept of users not needing to think where their device is communicating. The device might as well be talking to "the cloud" in the sky.
The point of "the cloud" was the occlusion to the end user.
I don't see much value in the phrase as it doesn't help me know what is going on in any way.
The point of "the cloud" was the concept of users not needing to think where their device is communicating. The device might as well be talking to "the cloud" in the sky.
The point of "the cloud" was the occlusion to the end user.
I don't see much value in the phrase as it doesn't help me know what is going on in any way.
I think that's unfair in the context of the time. There really was a lot of crap talked about cloud this and cloud that back then.
When people talk about VR experiences in the context of “the metaverse” I assume it’s implied there’s a shared space connecting those individual experiences.
We got the giant world-wide networked communication interface decades before we got the virtual-reality side of the metaverse. It turns out connecting billions of humans together on a single network was the easy part!
So all the interesting parts of the metaverse going forward are all the VR aspects which is why the discussions are focused on that.
So all the interesting parts of the metaverse going forward are all the VR aspects which is why the discussions are focused on that.
"Metaverse" is starting to sound like Zombo.com.
[deleted]
I wouldn't be so sure. Bigscreen in VR is amazing. Hanging out inside a virtual cinema auditorium watching stuff together with other random people is way better than I could ever have imagined.
I'm incredulous that having a screen strapped half an inch from your eyes for 8+ hours is desirable. I have an Oculus Rift, my face is sweaty/red in a couple of hours and there is an indent around my eyes. I'm sure newer tech can be much better, especially with airflow and an AR set that lets in natural light. We're not there yet, though.
I just got to try an Oculus Quest 2 and I was really blown away by how advanced it is, I didn't expect that. But at least in my case and at my age after a 2-3 hours of full use (when you run out of battery) my eyes are really tired and I was scratching them for a few days after.
So, it still need one extra generation at least, probably an "iPhone-like" moment but it's definitely addictive.
The Quest gave me persistent "seasickness" after use the first half dozen times I used it (this was last winter, I had nothing better to do than see if I could get better at tolerating it). I eventually got more tolerant of it, but after not using it for a while I'm hesitant to pick it up again in case I am back to square one. During use I could handle stationary scenes okay, but the after-effect was nasty. An incredible piece of technology, though.
The VR-sickness persisted for hours until I realized that the solution was to try and reset my system by walking outside and gazing at the horizon (which also works on seasickness to a point).
The VR-sickness persisted for hours until I realized that the solution was to try and reset my system by walking outside and gazing at the horizon (which also works on seasickness to a point).
In thirty years there will be a startup that you can get affordable eye replacements. Keep burning those eyes!
"If only you could see what I've seen with your eyes..." -- R.B. grin
Also, two words for people sharing VR goggles: ocular herpes.
Assume Joe spends 3 hours of TV a night. How much of that time is uninterrupted focused time? While watching TV, I can cook and eat dinner, do a load of laundry, answer email, casually browse the web, feed and let the dog out and at least minimally engage in small talk with family.
None of that I can do when fully immersed in VR. Which is probably why Facebook cares about it. Ads on TV are time to get up, in VR they can fully measure you engagement. Fully engaged in game and hungry, food delivery is one button press away.
None of that I can do when fully immersed in VR. Which is probably why Facebook cares about it. Ads on TV are time to get up, in VR they can fully measure you engagement. Fully engaged in game and hungry, food delivery is one button press away.
I think those are reasonable points - one thing from my life as someone who has basically turned my back on gaming due to the ‘real life game’ I’m involved in is that tv is a good escape/unwind when I can’t be arsed exercising/socialising but one of the reasons it is compelling is because the start-up times/stopping cost is basically zero - compared to either a pc or console game where not only do I have startup times to contend with but also the possibility of getting sucked towards the event horizon I can’t get out of and neglecting my level-ups in life
TV is relaxing. I can turn my brain off and don't need to do anything. The metaverse is just a fancy videogame that big tech companies need to invent so they can monetize another platform and sell more HW.
Sure, if you pay me to work in the metaverse I'll be happy to hang out there. Otherwise I'm not interested.
Sure, if you pay me to work in the metaverse I'll be happy to hang out there. Otherwise I'm not interested.
We’ll do the same thing we are mostly doing with games now: watching somebody playing it sitting next to you, like you’re friends, on some sort of in-game cloud.
But the metaverse itself is not content. Instead it’s another medium to consume content.
Therefore the metaverse isn’t a replacement for a video games or TV. You would simply watch TV or play a video game while in the metaverse.
The metaverse in that regard isn’t a new concept, because VR spaces have existed for a long time now. I’ve watched movies in Minecraft more recently, for example. I’ve seen every idea in the metaverse attempted in some game or application already.
The reason these VR spaces have not taken off, however, is because the medium to access these VR spaces have been pretty disappointing.
It’s the reason why the Internet took a long time to take off: using the Internet on a desktop computer sucks. When smartphones took off, so did the Internet.
Facebook has not fixed the medium problem as I see it. I have never gotten motion sickness, but I do not want to put on a VR headset for more than a few hours. I don’t even want to put on a VR headset to be honest. I’ve owned one for two years and it just sits in a drawer. I can’t imagine that many people want to put on a VR headset either if they could just watch TV while sitting on the couch, grabbing real drinks on their real table, and texting their friends.
Therefore the metaverse isn’t a replacement for a video games or TV. You would simply watch TV or play a video game while in the metaverse.
The metaverse in that regard isn’t a new concept, because VR spaces have existed for a long time now. I’ve watched movies in Minecraft more recently, for example. I’ve seen every idea in the metaverse attempted in some game or application already.
The reason these VR spaces have not taken off, however, is because the medium to access these VR spaces have been pretty disappointing.
It’s the reason why the Internet took a long time to take off: using the Internet on a desktop computer sucks. When smartphones took off, so did the Internet.
Facebook has not fixed the medium problem as I see it. I have never gotten motion sickness, but I do not want to put on a VR headset for more than a few hours. I don’t even want to put on a VR headset to be honest. I’ve owned one for two years and it just sits in a drawer. I can’t imagine that many people want to put on a VR headset either if they could just watch TV while sitting on the couch, grabbing real drinks on their real table, and texting their friends.
> It’s the reason why the Internet took a long time to take off: using the Internet on a desktop computer sucks. When smartphones took off, so did the Internet.
This is not true, the Internet took off in the U.S. in the mid-90s: https://ourworldindata.org/internet
The driving force was the WWW, not smartphones.
Personally, I would say exactly the opposite, the only advantage a smartphone has over a desktop computer for Internet usage is portability, otherwise the experience is worse in every way.
This is not true, the Internet took off in the U.S. in the mid-90s: https://ourworldindata.org/internet
The driving force was the WWW, not smartphones.
Personally, I would say exactly the opposite, the only advantage a smartphone has over a desktop computer for Internet usage is portability, otherwise the experience is worse in every way.
A big reason the internet took off is one that I guess will be banned by default in the metaverse : 18+ content.
The metaverse that wins will allow 18+ content.
Not Zuckerberg.
Not Zuckerberg.
But there is no P in FAANG. And Steam/etc don’t make their living on adult games. And youtube has no porn on it.
I think the issue with winning it with adult content will remain unchanged, at least for a while. Porn is so classic, that it cannot tunnel through this potential barrier.
I think the issue with winning it with adult content will remain unchanged, at least for a while. Porn is so classic, that it cannot tunnel through this potential barrier.
Google and Microsoft absolutely serve porn. "Safe search"? It's what Bing is known for.
People use their Apple devices for porn, controlling sex toys, and much more.
Amazon sells lube, sex toys, lingerie, and a whole host of other totally NSFW products.
Netflix has a ton of shows with nude actors bearing their breasts. Their show "Sex/Life" shows penises in a very sexual way.
Twitter, though admittedly not FAMNGA, notoriously allows and supports porn. They're very much the opposite of Tumblr, which died the moment they banned it.
Patreon thrives on porn.
People use their Apple devices for porn, controlling sex toys, and much more.
Amazon sells lube, sex toys, lingerie, and a whole host of other totally NSFW products.
Netflix has a ton of shows with nude actors bearing their breasts. Their show "Sex/Life" shows penises in a very sexual way.
Twitter, though admittedly not FAMNGA, notoriously allows and supports porn. They're very much the opposite of Tumblr, which died the moment they banned it.
Patreon thrives on porn.
[deleted]
And this is probably why facebook won't win.
And anonymity. See how many are active in VR community under their legal full real names. Some mention their IRL names on social profiles as footnotes, but if they did care, that person is not important in VR.
> It’s the reason why the Internet took a long time to take off: using the Internet on a desktop computer sucks. When smartphones took off, so did the Internet.
What?
What?
Honestly pre-2008 spending time online was pretty niche. I spent maybe a couple hours a day max on MySpace and LiveJournal and maybe a couple of forums once or twice a week. This was between pirating music and burning CDs for friends in high school which gave me a pretty high score on the nerd-index.
I was listening to a podcast on Flat Earthers and the host basically traced the explosion of True Believers to the advent of the smartphone circa 2008 onwards; suddenly hundreds of millions more people were spending hours a day online.
I was listening to a podcast on Flat Earthers and the host basically traced the explosion of True Believers to the advent of the smartphone circa 2008 onwards; suddenly hundreds of millions more people were spending hours a day online.
If the problem was really just the quality of headsets, you'd expect some dose-response relationship, I think. Headsets may not be good enough, but they're much better than they used to be, so you'd expect SOME stable growth in using it for shared environments Second Life style.
But that hasn't happened. I'm thinking the problem isn't lack of good VR, it's that a truly shared metaverse isn't really something we want.
We want our own spaces. We want to have the option to just "watch", to be invisible to the world we're exploring (or to lurk, in forum/chat terms).
When even better VR comes, I think it will be used for far more solitary activities than social ones. We do see some hints of a dose-response relationship there, with reasonably popular VR games like Half Life Alyx.
But that hasn't happened. I'm thinking the problem isn't lack of good VR, it's that a truly shared metaverse isn't really something we want.
We want our own spaces. We want to have the option to just "watch", to be invisible to the world we're exploring (or to lurk, in forum/chat terms).
When even better VR comes, I think it will be used for far more solitary activities than social ones. We do see some hints of a dose-response relationship there, with reasonably popular VR games like Half Life Alyx.
What are you saying? Lol
I could attribute the little use of internet pre-1994 to lack of ISP services, or the fact that people preferred html and modern search engines to the old protocols (ftp, archie, gopher), etc. But 2008, seriously?
I spent lots of hours in internet in college (pre-www) and later paid for CompuServe. By then www was already becoming known. Again, 2008. In what country do you live?
And you should try consuming internet in a desktop or laptop. Even a Chromebook works ok (but a gaming PC is better). Most apps offer a limited experience in mobile, or tablet (it sucks) and seriously, sites render much faster on a fast PC. I can right-click 10 links on the browser, send them to open in the background, consume each tab a close what doesn't work. It is so much nice and faster experience.
I could attribute the little use of internet pre-1994 to lack of ISP services, or the fact that people preferred html and modern search engines to the old protocols (ftp, archie, gopher), etc. But 2008, seriously?
I spent lots of hours in internet in college (pre-www) and later paid for CompuServe. By then www was already becoming known. Again, 2008. In what country do you live?
And you should try consuming internet in a desktop or laptop. Even a Chromebook works ok (but a gaming PC is better). Most apps offer a limited experience in mobile, or tablet (it sucks) and seriously, sites render much faster on a fast PC. I can right-click 10 links on the browser, send them to open in the background, consume each tab a close what doesn't work. It is so much nice and faster experience.
> Therefore the metaverse isn’t a replacement for a video games or TV. You would simply watch TV or play a video game while in the metaverse.
Thats the point. The answer to "when do I have time to use the meta verse" is "you have time to watch tv/entertainment, so yo have time to meta verse". Because people think of this as _something added_ to their life, not something augmented.
Thats the point. The answer to "when do I have time to use the meta verse" is "you have time to watch tv/entertainment, so yo have time to meta verse". Because people think of this as _something added_ to their life, not something augmented.
I hardly ever "watch" TV. But I often have the TV on while I'm doing something else.
With this metaverse stuff you have to wear the stupid goggles. You can't just have it on in the background and glance up if something interesting comes on. This is why 3D TVs failed in the market. The technology worked fine but most regular people didn't want to wear the goggles just to watch a movie.
With this metaverse stuff you have to wear the stupid goggles. You can't just have it on in the background and glance up if something interesting comes on. This is why 3D TVs failed in the market. The technology worked fine but most regular people didn't want to wear the goggles just to watch a movie.
Conceptually, a VR workroom sounds like it could be extremely nifty. As someone easily distracted, I'd love to be able to sit in space with only a text editor open and do my thing.
In practice, excluding resolution, wearing a headset for hours on end seems even more straining both for the neck and eyes than the alternative real life workstation.
In practice, excluding resolution, wearing a headset for hours on end seems even more straining both for the neck and eyes than the alternative real life workstation.
It only sounds cool until you have to be sitting in a virtual room for 8 hours while your work engagement is analyzed for various micromanagers to sift through
> 1) Most american adults watch several hours of TV per day. alternatively, many play a few hours of video games.
Isn't that still about <25 and > 60, or those without kids? I hardly can find a calm 30-60 mins per day to just sit and read, sometimes play for 30 mins (2 kids) just before sleep.
Isn't that still about <25 and > 60, or those without kids? I hardly can find a calm 30-60 mins per day to just sit and read, sometimes play for 30 mins (2 kids) just before sleep.
It's not a great sign for the metaverse that it's such a nebulous concept for so many people. Even "the cloud" could be boiled down to "other people's computers". The internet was hard for people to understand at first, but it didn't have a unified marketing push behind it. So far, a unified marketing push is all there is to the metaverse, and still nobody knows with the f*ck it's supposed to be.
"Thats 8+ hours a day you can spend in metaverse."
I hope he plans to be spending 8 hours a day in "metaverse" but I'm sure as fuck not going to be.
I hope he plans to be spending 8 hours a day in "metaverse" but I'm sure as fuck not going to be.
I'll bite back on these 2 points, even though you're just paraphrasing Zuck.
1) I'm definitely willing to believe that most adults spend a lot of time vegging out, even if I/we don't. Does this mean that one goal of the metaverse is to suck cash out of those folks? "People already waste a lot of time. The metaverse is great because it makes money off of that." I could also interpret this one in a lighter way. Perhaps the metaverse is somehow better than regular vegging out; gives you exercise or something.
2) My take here is similar to some sibling comments. This just sounds like a VR application, and I'm not sure where the "metaverse" comes in. Unless by "metaverse" we mean "internet", which already exists and is (thankfully) not run by Facebook. And even then, I don't see where the internet comes in either! I can dev/create offline, can't I?
1) I'm definitely willing to believe that most adults spend a lot of time vegging out, even if I/we don't. Does this mean that one goal of the metaverse is to suck cash out of those folks? "People already waste a lot of time. The metaverse is great because it makes money off of that." I could also interpret this one in a lighter way. Perhaps the metaverse is somehow better than regular vegging out; gives you exercise or something.
2) My take here is similar to some sibling comments. This just sounds like a VR application, and I'm not sure where the "metaverse" comes in. Unless by "metaverse" we mean "internet", which already exists and is (thankfully) not run by Facebook. And even then, I don't see where the internet comes in either! I can dev/create offline, can't I?
But I work from home because I hate the office, why would I want to visit a virtual one. It sounds terrible!
I have a Quest 2 and had a Vive before that. The Quest 2 is way more convenient. But I'm still too tired/lazy to put it on most of the time and would rather veg out on the couch.
I can't be the only one who feels this way?
I can't be the only one who feels this way?
Sure, that's also what sport coaches, musician teachers, people teaching cooking on youtube and librarians say.
Also you should get 8 hours of sleep, buy food at the farmers market, spend time with your familly, meditate, get this GTD rolling, and learn a new skill for your carreer.
But honestly, the truth is, as soon as VR is cheap and comfy, I think people will rush to it anyway for one reason: porn. So the metaverse can grow, if like in second life, it allows for porn to develop. But since FB tend to want a family friendly experience, I think we got a betamax vs VHS situation here.
Also you should get 8 hours of sleep, buy food at the farmers market, spend time with your familly, meditate, get this GTD rolling, and learn a new skill for your carreer.
But honestly, the truth is, as soon as VR is cheap and comfy, I think people will rush to it anyway for one reason: porn. So the metaverse can grow, if like in second life, it allows for porn to develop. But since FB tend to want a family friendly experience, I think we got a betamax vs VHS situation here.
Second Life was big into online gambling.
There was a side dish of turn of the century real estate hucksterism. Buy because everyone else is buying. Buy high sell low as retail always does LOL.
And pr0n as you mention.
Also 3d modelers and CAD folks built elaborate structures that were always empty but impressive to admire. The supply of skilled draftsmen and architects willing to work for free VASTLY exceeds the demand.
The most interesting meta activity on second life was stuff that doesn't require second life or 3d or any of that, it was just a fancy screen saver behind people doing simple IRC texting, etc. The philosophy club meetup sounded fun but it was basically walk to a virtual campfire then watch people too high to think, try to instant message philosophical stuff to sound wittier than the next guy. Like karma farming with people too high to succeed but its OK because the platform doesn't have karma LOL. Didn't go many of those LOL.
Second life had a weird attitude toward real life where it was not allowed to use your real name. To prevent "funny names" they gave a huge list of first and last names and let you pick. I found Turbo Pascal and thought it witty because I used that once rather expensive ($250 for a pascal compiler used to be a bargain compared to what D.E.C. charged...) software package 20 yrs previously (now more like 40 yrs) and unfortunately the only reactions I got were confusion and "hey did you know your name is an actual program my dad used?" so it wasn't so fun. I'd rather have used my name.
But that was it, those five things and the rest was empty. I was there, that's how I remember it.
There was a side dish of turn of the century real estate hucksterism. Buy because everyone else is buying. Buy high sell low as retail always does LOL.
And pr0n as you mention.
Also 3d modelers and CAD folks built elaborate structures that were always empty but impressive to admire. The supply of skilled draftsmen and architects willing to work for free VASTLY exceeds the demand.
The most interesting meta activity on second life was stuff that doesn't require second life or 3d or any of that, it was just a fancy screen saver behind people doing simple IRC texting, etc. The philosophy club meetup sounded fun but it was basically walk to a virtual campfire then watch people too high to think, try to instant message philosophical stuff to sound wittier than the next guy. Like karma farming with people too high to succeed but its OK because the platform doesn't have karma LOL. Didn't go many of those LOL.
Second life had a weird attitude toward real life where it was not allowed to use your real name. To prevent "funny names" they gave a huge list of first and last names and let you pick. I found Turbo Pascal and thought it witty because I used that once rather expensive ($250 for a pascal compiler used to be a bargain compared to what D.E.C. charged...) software package 20 yrs previously (now more like 40 yrs) and unfortunately the only reactions I got were confusion and "hey did you know your name is an actual program my dad used?" so it wasn't so fun. I'd rather have used my name.
But that was it, those five things and the rest was empty. I was there, that's how I remember it.
You haven't lived until a dragon apologizes for stepping on you at a furry night club.
Can you actually wear the heavy goggles for that long?
Probably - there are various large groups of people who wear a helmet every day for most of the day, and goggles are comparable in weight to that.
Between that and staring downward at the phone while walking down the street, this will all be a blessing for chiropractors.
Yes, and HMDs are only going to get lighter in the coming years.
The problem is that the more you make the virtual world like the real world the less relaxing it is. I don't have the mental energy these days for things that are too immersive.
Some people are just not going to want to spend 8 hours a day interacting with people to go home and interact with other real people in a reality-like medium.
Some people are just not going to want to spend 8 hours a day interacting with people to go home and interact with other real people in a reality-like medium.
It's up to you what you do in the metaverse. No one is forcing you to socialize.
Then it's just VR
Yeah, even things like gather.town people have said worked well for things like happy hours for teams working remotely. Having some virtual equivalent of physical space helps people socialize more naturally.
If you thought zoom/teams for 6-8-10hrs a day was bad, try doing it in VR!
Ah yes... The company that created the biggest productivity sink ever will solve all of our work from home issues...
I'm 43, I don't play regularly because of work/kids/etc. but every now and then I log into one of my favourite servers and spend some time there.
Two years ago I have built a base on 2b2t[1], located millions of blocks away from spawn, it took many hours of travelling through nether highways to get there. Before starting the journey, I had to escape spawn (a very dangerous area since 2b2t is an anarchy server) and I had to find valuable items from scavenging abandoned bases. After I finished my base, I made friends on the server, I have also helped building one of the highways, using a hacked Minecraft client that includes tools to build tunnels automatically[2].
There is also another server that I have visited regularly, MinecraftOnline[3], I built a house there and I made some friends, this one has rules and moderators unlike 2b2t which is an anarchy server. On both servers there is a rich community, a subculture specific to the server, and even specific activities that stem from each server's subculture[4][5]
Based on my experience, I have to agree with the article, Minecraft is an amazing and diverse metaverse.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2b2t
[2] Highway Tools demonstration https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rwkDk_Xn2Y4
[3] https://minecraftonline.com/
[4] https://minecraftonline.com/wiki/Pigchinko_(Game)
[5] Guide to Crystal PvP on 2b2t https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YOImrm9ldTY
Two years ago I have built a base on 2b2t[1], located millions of blocks away from spawn, it took many hours of travelling through nether highways to get there. Before starting the journey, I had to escape spawn (a very dangerous area since 2b2t is an anarchy server) and I had to find valuable items from scavenging abandoned bases. After I finished my base, I made friends on the server, I have also helped building one of the highways, using a hacked Minecraft client that includes tools to build tunnels automatically[2].
There is also another server that I have visited regularly, MinecraftOnline[3], I built a house there and I made some friends, this one has rules and moderators unlike 2b2t which is an anarchy server. On both servers there is a rich community, a subculture specific to the server, and even specific activities that stem from each server's subculture[4][5]
Based on my experience, I have to agree with the article, Minecraft is an amazing and diverse metaverse.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2b2t
[2] Highway Tools demonstration https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rwkDk_Xn2Y4
[3] https://minecraftonline.com/
[4] https://minecraftonline.com/wiki/Pigchinko_(Game)
[5] Guide to Crystal PvP on 2b2t https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YOImrm9ldTY
2b2t is amazing, you just keep on discovering things everywhere you go. It's just a shame the chat is so toxic. MinecraftOnline isn't much better just because there's no griefing, they really stick to their "100% free speech" rule.
Most "hacked" clients that are commonly used on anarchy servers have additional options for chat, including spam filters and even options for hiding the chat completely. I use spam filters a lot and sometimes hide the chat completely. One option that I like is hiding all messages except private messages.
You make time for the things that interest you.
Also it does sound like you're mixing your run of the mill grindy MMO with Minecraft. Your MC world will still be there if you don't touch it for a week. Even on a server.
Okay, it may depend on the culture of said server, but that's exactly the point of the article.
I play MC on an 18+ server that's building oriented. That means everyone has a job and other interests. We just show up and place our blocks when we feel like it. I just logged in yesterday after a 2 week break. People disappear for months. Nobody sees a problem with it.
Also it does sound like you're mixing your run of the mill grindy MMO with Minecraft. Your MC world will still be there if you don't touch it for a week. Even on a server.
Okay, it may depend on the culture of said server, but that's exactly the point of the article.
I play MC on an 18+ server that's building oriented. That means everyone has a job and other interests. We just show up and place our blocks when we feel like it. I just logged in yesterday after a 2 week break. People disappear for months. Nobody sees a problem with it.
29 years old no kids here, have lots of coworkers in the same cohort. During the pandemic in particular a lot of friends started to pick up VRChat, and a majority of people in my age group still regularly play games. I think that's not that untypical honestly, I can see quite a few adults sinking at least a few hours per week into it if it gets interesting enough.
Seconding this - have used VRChat a lot during the pandemic. Asking me why I’d spend time on the metaverse is like asking why I’d go to a bar. I won’t defend it as the best possible use of my time, but it’s fun to go meet people.
How many people spend a lot of time on social media? Billions, this is just providing a more immersive interaction for that. VR is only a tiny portion of that and I'm expecting AR and haptics and a whole bunch of other tech that enable more diverse sensory experiences to play a part here.
I don't really want "Meta" to own all of that largely because what made the internet successful was having no gatekeeper and a very low barrier to entry. Not that that's true anymore, but having no initial gatekeeper let people do crazy things for 30 years while the current gatekeepers were establishing themselves.
I don't really want "Meta" to own all of that largely because what made the internet successful was having no gatekeeper and a very low barrier to entry. Not that that's true anymore, but having no initial gatekeeper let people do crazy things for 30 years while the current gatekeepers were establishing themselves.
I think the end vision for the metaverse is to swallow up a lot of those time sinks in a typical lifespan. Working, shopping, socializing, etc. could theoretically be supplanted by a metaverse (for better or worse).
You answered your own question - it's a play for the next generation.
My kids bounce between a multitude of shared digital spaces (games, chat, social, videos etc) and they would be right at home at some kind of metaverse that would bridge them all (if that's even possible).
My kids bounce between a multitude of shared digital spaces (games, chat, social, videos etc) and they would be right at home at some kind of metaverse that would bridge them all (if that's even possible).
The amount of 25-35 year old adults that play video games is pretty huge.
The amount of 6-60 year old video gamers is huge. 25's a strange number to start, and 35 is far too young to cut off.
and a lot of people that don't think they are gamers are the most lucrative set of gamers.
they are the freemium and mobile segment. dismissed by both the toxic gaming communities and themselves, but noticed by the companies who will change their whole trillion dollar business name to snag them further.
they are the freemium and mobile segment. dismissed by both the toxic gaming communities and themselves, but noticed by the companies who will change their whole trillion dollar business name to snag them further.
[deleted]
Don’t discount 35-65 (or beyond) either.
Maybe thinking of it as a separate experience is limiting how people make use of it.
I wonder if anyone has run remote team meetings or virtual classrooms in Minecraft as I imagine it would be a lot less fatiguing than Zoom style teleconferencing. The fact that in MC you can easily see where other players are looking adds a lot to the experience.
I wonder if anyone has run remote team meetings or virtual classrooms in Minecraft as I imagine it would be a lot less fatiguing than Zoom style teleconferencing. The fact that in MC you can easily see where other players are looking adds a lot to the experience.
I think that's partially how the education edition is supposed to be used, but I've never actually seen it happen.
Metaverse may not end up being something that you end up glued to for a long period of time exclusively, the interactions will also bleed into other parts of your life. The main example would be that you could buy items for a Metaverse game in an online store on, and you would browse around there on your phone while you're waiting in line for coffee or the bus or whatever, just like we would do online shopping.
Metaverse would also wrap itself around a lot of the things people do already, like watch movies or concerts, coupled with games of any size and type. So as opposed to a stereotypical 6-hour WoW raid lifestyle, you could, for example, watch a virtual concert with friends, then afterwards jump onto a couple rounds of some Fortnite game variant, similar to how we do it today but just within the 'verse. But you could also immerse yourself for longer if you want to.
Honestly Metaverse seems more to me like a digital version of a big shopping mall with a bowling alley, arcade, and movie theater. You can hang out all day there or just drop in to get something from a store, or just get dinner and a movie.
Metaverse would also wrap itself around a lot of the things people do already, like watch movies or concerts, coupled with games of any size and type. So as opposed to a stereotypical 6-hour WoW raid lifestyle, you could, for example, watch a virtual concert with friends, then afterwards jump onto a couple rounds of some Fortnite game variant, similar to how we do it today but just within the 'verse. But you could also immerse yourself for longer if you want to.
Honestly Metaverse seems more to me like a digital version of a big shopping mall with a bowling alley, arcade, and movie theater. You can hang out all day there or just drop in to get something from a store, or just get dinner and a movie.
The Bureau of Labor Statistics conducts the American Time Use Survey [1], which tracks how people spend their time. This includes a breakdown by age (see table 9).
In every single age group, the average person spends over 4 hours per day on leisure and sports activities, the majority of which is watching TV (and very little of which is exercise or reading).
This is true even for people with children, with the exception of those with a child under 6 years of age. They spend an average of 3.86 hours/day on leisure and sports activities, 1.91 hours/day of which is watching TV.
It seems as though there is plenty of time for the metaverse.
[1] https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/atus.pdf
In every single age group, the average person spends over 4 hours per day on leisure and sports activities, the majority of which is watching TV (and very little of which is exercise or reading).
This is true even for people with children, with the exception of those with a child under 6 years of age. They spend an average of 3.86 hours/day on leisure and sports activities, 1.91 hours/day of which is watching TV.
It seems as though there is plenty of time for the metaverse.
[1] https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/atus.pdf
I feel the same. The other day there was a video submit to HN that I didn't watch because I wasn't in a situation where I could watch a video. Basically making pancakes for kids, having an IRL conversation in the background, and checking HN while waiting to turn the pancake.
If HN was on metaverse where I have to get an immersive headset on to use it... Yeah, I wouldn't be using it nearly as often as I do.
As you get older, the best feature of our existing 'metaverse' is its ability to integrate with the 'meat-a-verse' seamlessly. The higher the barrier of moving between the *verses, the harder it is to use the one in which we can't actually keep our meat fit and fed.
But what do I know (old man yelling at clouds).
If HN was on metaverse where I have to get an immersive headset on to use it... Yeah, I wouldn't be using it nearly as often as I do.
As you get older, the best feature of our existing 'metaverse' is its ability to integrate with the 'meat-a-verse' seamlessly. The higher the barrier of moving between the *verses, the harder it is to use the one in which we can't actually keep our meat fit and fed.
But what do I know (old man yelling at clouds).
I also kick myself for not finishing things. Namely programming projects, my game backlog and lots of other things that are strictly digital. While you seem to want to get away from the computer I want to spend more time in front of it.
I don't mean this as a criticism of anyone. I do find though that there are types of people (likely including you and I) who feel compelled to move and do things such that our down time is extremely valuable. I do have kids which makes it quite a bit more challenging. I feel motivated on an hourly basis to accomplish things, though - it matters to me to make progress on the things I care about.
There are other people who very much don't care. To them, progress might be watching the next episode of a show, or grinding in some game they love.
I'm fine with either type of person, really. It does explain why what seems like an impossible use of time to us is actually very appealing to others. Why would we be in there when there's a book to read, a concept to learn, people we don't see often enough, etc? And yet, why wouldn't they?
I think the metaverse aims to appeal to us as well eventually; imagine interactive classes on X or Y to help you learn faster with tools that are currently impossible? What if we could save time by seeing loved ones more easily in the metaverse, making more time for those things we want to make progress on? I'm not bullish on that, though. It sounds creepy. I want to hug the people I love, hear them laugh in person, make them nice food. I'm not interested in expediting that facet of my life.
Even now, despite growing up with webcams around I still find FaceTime fairly impersonal and uninteresting. I use it only when I really need to.
There are other people who very much don't care. To them, progress might be watching the next episode of a show, or grinding in some game they love.
I'm fine with either type of person, really. It does explain why what seems like an impossible use of time to us is actually very appealing to others. Why would we be in there when there's a book to read, a concept to learn, people we don't see often enough, etc? And yet, why wouldn't they?
I think the metaverse aims to appeal to us as well eventually; imagine interactive classes on X or Y to help you learn faster with tools that are currently impossible? What if we could save time by seeing loved ones more easily in the metaverse, making more time for those things we want to make progress on? I'm not bullish on that, though. It sounds creepy. I want to hug the people I love, hear them laugh in person, make them nice food. I'm not interested in expediting that facet of my life.
Even now, despite growing up with webcams around I still find FaceTime fairly impersonal and uninteresting. I use it only when I really need to.
More like 6 hours, if you consider work time, commute time (for folks who'll still have to do that), meal prep, etc.
But I don't think that's really the point. People use those 6 hours in a bunch of different ways. Some of those hours might be replaced by a metaverse experience entirely (as in, "I used to do play video games on my console, but I can get the same experience, but better, playing games in the metaverse"), and other activities might get nudged out because they aren't as (subjectively) enjoyable as the metaverse to some people. And other people will just not do the metaverse thing, because other activities are more fun to them. FB is betting on the user group being very large, and I don't know that I'd disagree with them.
And the same thing will always happen: people will continue to kick themselves for not finishing that book, or getting that extra workout in. That will continue to be the case with or without the metaverse.
Also consider that something like a metaverse could become the standard way for remote knowledge workers to get in a "room" together to collaborate. That alone seems like a large user base.
But I don't think that's really the point. People use those 6 hours in a bunch of different ways. Some of those hours might be replaced by a metaverse experience entirely (as in, "I used to do play video games on my console, but I can get the same experience, but better, playing games in the metaverse"), and other activities might get nudged out because they aren't as (subjectively) enjoyable as the metaverse to some people. And other people will just not do the metaverse thing, because other activities are more fun to them. FB is betting on the user group being very large, and I don't know that I'd disagree with them.
And the same thing will always happen: people will continue to kick themselves for not finishing that book, or getting that extra workout in. That will continue to be the case with or without the metaverse.
Also consider that something like a metaverse could become the standard way for remote knowledge workers to get in a "room" together to collaborate. That alone seems like a large user base.
You're preaching to the choir. This is why I'd always rather read an article or a book than watch a video if I'm trying to learn something. I'll watch TV or a movie if I'm only aiming to be entertained. But for something I want to try to retain or if I'm trying to get business done, text wins for me.
The concept of the metaverse also involves doing those activities (e.g., work, fitness, entertainment) inside the metaverse. For instance, the home workout videos that people watch on their TVs these days could someday be replaced by an immersive fitness experience on AR glasses.
[deleted]
Agreed. There's way too many things to do in reality. I have about 30-60 minutes a day of Me Time, and the last thing I want to do is piss it away in front of a computer when I've already spent 70% of my time doing exactly that.
Go outside, people. Talk to your friends in reality if possible. Experience the place you live in; participate in something physical to improve it materially. There's no end of socialization and minigames in reality, the graphics are better, and it's free.
Go outside, people. Talk to your friends in reality if possible. Experience the place you live in; participate in something physical to improve it materially. There's no end of socialization and minigames in reality, the graphics are better, and it's free.
The time I spend in Minecraft is either meditation time or social time.
It's an even better experience when there's a modpack on the server with a near-infinite number of things to do, too.
It's an even better experience when there's a modpack on the server with a near-infinite number of things to do, too.
> near-infinite number of things to do
I've been having a great time going the other way - Skyblock! Start with very little, build up from there.
I've been having a great time going the other way - Skyblock! Start with very little, build up from there.
Now you can read the book in the metaverse!
Kidding. Kinda.
Obligatory Futurama:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C6eRqMiAxQ0
Kidding. Kinda.
Obligatory Futurama:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C6eRqMiAxQ0
This article and most people I have seen so far, get the concept of metaverse wrong. It's much simpler conceptually (though exceptionally hard technically) than people understand.
The metaverse is the result of instrumenting the real world to capture and interact with the data the real world provides. Think "Digital Twin" of the world that refreshes at 100Hz.
It's not a place you go, it becomes the landscape you live in, because everything becomes a data source.
The metaverse is the result of instrumenting the real world to capture and interact with the data the real world provides. Think "Digital Twin" of the world that refreshes at 100Hz.
It's not a place you go, it becomes the landscape you live in, because everything becomes a data source.
tbf I think that there's something special about games like MC, I still like it even well into my twenties.
I don't play much but I do like spending a few hours on occasion spending time with friends, playing a game we started to when we were teens.
My recommendation to anyone who wants to play something creative, get on a voice call and get with your friends.
I don't play much but I do like spending a few hours on occasion spending time with friends, playing a game we started to when we were teens.
My recommendation to anyone who wants to play something creative, get on a voice call and get with your friends.
Given how much time everyone I interact with (and myself) spend with our heads buried on phones, mindlessly scrolling, I’d say an extremely large number of people would gladly transition to an augmented reality world, and stare at walls for an equally long amount of time
Working remotely? That's 8 hours of digital world / metaverse experience right there. Most people have at least another 2 hours of screen time on top of that. I know I have days that are just screen time essentially.
Depends what you mean by “metaverse.” I have 3 kids and use my Oculus maybe 3 times a week for 30-45 minutes each time. Lovely escapism. I can go to the beach and the mountains and back in a half hour.
Unless.. its super easy to convert what obsesses ones day into 3d and park it in the world. But then its just humanitys meme & memory junkyard.. kind of like a book with sad faces.
People already spend hours and hours per day on social media, very often just to fill time and avoid boredom. I can absolutely see the metaverse taking up some of that time.
you will have time.
it will be your workday.
pack up bed. unfold desk. eat breakfast. put on headset. take off headset. eat dinner. pack up desk. set up bed. go to sleep.
pack up bed. unfold desk. eat breakfast. put on headset. take off headset. eat dinner. pack up desk. set up bed. go to sleep.
And what about videogames? Some people spend thousands of hours each year playing videogames, and not all of them are high school or college students.
Seriously. I don’t have time to do the things I need to do, much less the things I want to do. I haven’t had time for TV, books, movies, etc. in years.
The ones that I have met did so because their children were into it. An hour or two a day adds up pretty quickly if you're building
We don't have 16h each day if we're working and sleeping,
we have 8.
With software improvements, our perception of time will eventually be slowed down in the metaverse to such an extent that one hour in the material world will equate to several days of perceived elapsed time in meta-reality.
It's hard for me to believe one hour to several days but one hour (material world) to two hours would, probably, be already achievable. Now I watch most videos on youtube at 2x speed.
Do you have any context which would indicate this is possible?
Only if we are cloned and are pure software beings. In that case, it is possible to run at a faster "clock speed". Of course, this is all in the realm of sci-fi.
Might be sarcasm?
as an adult with kids i have managed periods to deeply immerse in minecraft with friends and also pubg. it is fun but hard to sustain
lol don't worry, zuck wants us to work in the metaverse too
No, it is not. Neither is Roblox or Fortnite, or VRchat. A single game or world is NOT the metaverse, what is so hard to understand about that for journalists and companies?
The metaverse is the immersive internet, as a successor to our current one that is more 2D oriented around photos/videos/text today. It's a paradigm shift in how we interact, but most importantly there will be many of these virtual worlds/spaces interconnected together to form an actual network that nobody outright owns. To get to this future, we need protocols/standards to allow virtual worlds to talk to one another and agree that users can hop back in forth between them seamlessly, across all platforms.
More specifically, the way we use the web today to navigate from webpage to another is how we we traverse the metaverse. The core problem that needs to get solved right now is interoperability, to enable the "web of 3D".
Look to WebGPU, WebAssembly, and WebXR as cornerstone technologies here. Our startup is building the "3D/VR web" in this way, and our current focus is getting proper HTML5 exporting from the native game engines, currently Unreal Engine. We're also building out a suite of tooling to empower developers and creators along with our hosting/discovery platform that includes advanced texture compression + asynchronous asset fetching to enable 3D/VR websites that load as quickly as a regular 2D page. If you're a developer and are interested in our work, you can join our Discord here:
https://discord.gg/zUSZ3T8
The metaverse is the immersive internet, as a successor to our current one that is more 2D oriented around photos/videos/text today. It's a paradigm shift in how we interact, but most importantly there will be many of these virtual worlds/spaces interconnected together to form an actual network that nobody outright owns. To get to this future, we need protocols/standards to allow virtual worlds to talk to one another and agree that users can hop back in forth between them seamlessly, across all platforms.
More specifically, the way we use the web today to navigate from webpage to another is how we we traverse the metaverse. The core problem that needs to get solved right now is interoperability, to enable the "web of 3D".
Look to WebGPU, WebAssembly, and WebXR as cornerstone technologies here. Our startup is building the "3D/VR web" in this way, and our current focus is getting proper HTML5 exporting from the native game engines, currently Unreal Engine. We're also building out a suite of tooling to empower developers and creators along with our hosting/discovery platform that includes advanced texture compression + asynchronous asset fetching to enable 3D/VR websites that load as quickly as a regular 2D page. If you're a developer and are interested in our work, you can join our Discord here:
https://discord.gg/zUSZ3T8
The 2D internet works though because it's an efficient means of communication and data transfer. When I search the weather, check directions, send a message, book a flight, buy a shirt, or view the daily news, I can get that done fast on the existing internet. I don't want to load a 3D world to read an article. I don't need to walk around as a 3D avatar to ask a friend what time they're arriving. It's inefficient. It's not the future of the internet. It's a gimmick or form of entertainment.
That being said, I did think it was the future of the internet 15-20 years ago when I was taking CAD files of products and turning them into interactive 3D Flash websites. Then I realized my mistake. People don't want fancy graphics or animations when browsing the internet. They want data. They want it fast, and they want it organized and presented to them in the most efficient way.
For that reason, I don't believe the future of the internet is the metaverse. The future will be something along the lines of neuralink, where information is instantly sent and received from the brain. Instead of spending 20 minutes reading a Wikipedia article, the information will be instantly sent to your brain. Instead of pulling out your phone and checking directions to a restaurant, you'll know where to go just by thinking that very question. The internet will basically be an extension of your brain. What the internet knows, you'll know. That's the future.
That being said, I did think it was the future of the internet 15-20 years ago when I was taking CAD files of products and turning them into interactive 3D Flash websites. Then I realized my mistake. People don't want fancy graphics or animations when browsing the internet. They want data. They want it fast, and they want it organized and presented to them in the most efficient way.
For that reason, I don't believe the future of the internet is the metaverse. The future will be something along the lines of neuralink, where information is instantly sent and received from the brain. Instead of spending 20 minutes reading a Wikipedia article, the information will be instantly sent to your brain. Instead of pulling out your phone and checking directions to a restaurant, you'll know where to go just by thinking that very question. The internet will basically be an extension of your brain. What the internet knows, you'll know. That's the future.
I underestimated Minecraft. I knew it is important, so I tried it out two years ago but dismissed it when I got killed by a zombie. I thought, fuck it, I don't need anxiety when it gets night in the game.
But then a friend of my son played Minecraft.
I installed Minecraft on a Chromebook then I watched the children figuring out Minecraft. I figured out lot of things, too.
When I discovered that they created a railway and put monsters onto the trolleys, first I had a hearty laugh then I got intrigued again. I discovered that Minecraft Education Edition has a coding environment similar to Scratch from MIT. I showed them how to create a giant ice cube and dig narrow aisles inside it. Next they created a giant cube of TNT and set it off.
Anyway, I think what will happen: you can't centrally create a world. You need people. So when I read the article I found myself just nodding.
People will find ways how to define and use the metaverse, not that company.
But then a friend of my son played Minecraft.
I installed Minecraft on a Chromebook then I watched the children figuring out Minecraft. I figured out lot of things, too.
When I discovered that they created a railway and put monsters onto the trolleys, first I had a hearty laugh then I got intrigued again. I discovered that Minecraft Education Edition has a coding environment similar to Scratch from MIT. I showed them how to create a giant ice cube and dig narrow aisles inside it. Next they created a giant cube of TNT and set it off.
Anyway, I think what will happen: you can't centrally create a world. You need people. So when I read the article I found myself just nodding.
People will find ways how to define and use the metaverse, not that company.
> The internet will basically be an extension of your brain. What the internet knows, you'll know.
I'll know that the stone masons crashed planes into the world trade center to destroy the studio where they faked the moon landing?
I'll know that the stone masons crashed planes into the world trade center to destroy the studio where they faked the moon landing?
This is literally the worst take I've ever read on hn. What's your background in neuropsychology? On what basis besides Elon Musk PR do you have to make this prognostication?
It's never going to happen because that's not the way the human beings work. Which anyone with any knowledge of the brain (i.e. not tech bros) will readily tell you.
It's never going to happen because that's not the way the human beings work. Which anyone with any knowledge of the brain (i.e. not tech bros) will readily tell you.
I have zero background in neuropsychology, however, I think I'm still entitled to share my opinion and make predictions on the future.
I'm not suggesting this will happen in 5 or 10 years. However, I would be very surprised if a few hundred years pass and we don't have a more efficient means of transferring data into our brain, and we're still slowly reading books and spending decades of our life receiving an education.
Or, maybe you're right, and this will never happen. We'll forever be reading, writing, and using speech as our primary means of data transfer with our brain, and that'll be the peak of efficiency until the end of time.
However, given that I can play billiards with someone on the other side of the world, in real-time, in virtual reality, I don't think it's too crazy to imagine a future where I can get a Wikipedia article into my brain faster than reading.
I'm not suggesting this will happen in 5 or 10 years. However, I would be very surprised if a few hundred years pass and we don't have a more efficient means of transferring data into our brain, and we're still slowly reading books and spending decades of our life receiving an education.
Or, maybe you're right, and this will never happen. We'll forever be reading, writing, and using speech as our primary means of data transfer with our brain, and that'll be the peak of efficiency until the end of time.
However, given that I can play billiards with someone on the other side of the world, in real-time, in virtual reality, I don't think it's too crazy to imagine a future where I can get a Wikipedia article into my brain faster than reading.
[deleted]
That's the metaverse we wish for, yet it's not the metaverse FB wants to build. It is the metaverse only in name, but it's just another proprietary sillowed plateform built to milk users.
A metaverse should have an HTTP-like protocol, with the goal to interconnect, to give power to the client, while allowing an ecosystem to build, because it would be defined as an open standard.
We need a 2021 Tim Berners Lee, not a Mark Zuckerberg.
A metaverse should have an HTTP-like protocol, with the goal to interconnect, to give power to the client, while allowing an ecosystem to build, because it would be defined as an open standard.
We need a 2021 Tim Berners Lee, not a Mark Zuckerberg.
Agreed. This is the linuxy open source metaverse that nerds like us will promote on forums like this.
The general public will use the walled garden capitalistic metaverse because it will be better.
The general public will use the walled garden capitalistic metaverse because it will be better.
You mean like facebook is better than the freaking entire _internet_ ?
Like how MacOSX is better than Linux.
MacOSX may have been better than Linux when MacOSX was at its peak a few years ago, but nowadays Apple is busy making it worse while Linux keeps improving.
Minecraft is actually a great example here—the client and server ecosystem is extremely, extremely diverse, with lots of different choices for users. Almost everyone who uses Minecraft on desktop is running some mod, if only Optifine, and the server landscape is even more diverse, with dozens of competing reimplementations, all communicating over a shared protocol. I think Minecraft is a great example in the current landscape of a naturally evolved diverse, unowned network of interactive virtual spaces. If Mojang disappeared tomorrow, the only thing the community would need to solve is authentication (and for our use-case, something like mTLS would work super well)
Agree with everything you said, but to me one key piece of the minecraft ecosystem rules it out as a meta verse contender - every one of those permutations you mentioned drops players into their own isolated environment which does not interact with any others. At best you can pop a few hundred people into a server specially configured for that, or use a discord/irc shim to bridge chat across a few instances.
I get the sense something more integrated at the user experience level is being suggested here as ‘metaverse’. I guess part of my read on that is cynical - if true it suggests a winner takes operator all at the centre with some kind of app/content ecosystem alongside. Perhaps I’m reading the roblox comparisons too literally.
I get the sense something more integrated at the user experience level is being suggested here as ‘metaverse’. I guess part of my read on that is cynical - if true it suggests a winner takes operator all at the centre with some kind of app/content ecosystem alongside. Perhaps I’m reading the roblox comparisons too literally.
Check out the large scale MMOs. No one interacts with everyone else. They find a guild and play with those people.
It's not that hard to find a different minecraft server, there are bazillions of server lists. That would be the equivalent of changing guild or being in several guilds at the same time.
I don't think we humans want to be part of a large crowd. More like part of one or more small groups. Before the internet it was mostly one. Now you can easily do several.
It's not that hard to find a different minecraft server, there are bazillions of server lists. That would be the equivalent of changing guild or being in several guilds at the same time.
I don't think we humans want to be part of a large crowd. More like part of one or more small groups. Before the internet it was mostly one. Now you can easily do several.
> No one interacts with everyone else. They find a guild and play with those people.
This really depends on the MMO. In World of Warcraft, yes this is majorly the case in the past few years. In games like FFXIV, this is most certainly not the case.
WoW enables the behavior of only playing with your guild because the community at large is toxic which is also enabled by the game.
FFXIV has a much stronger community, players greeting each other in cities, sitting down to watch a Bard play video game music on a harp or everyone chatting in party chat through cutscenes in main story dungeons.
There is a sense of community in these games that draws people to them. I think certain groups of people do want to be a part of a large crowd, but not when doing so puts them at risk of being put down like in WoW.
This really depends on the MMO. In World of Warcraft, yes this is majorly the case in the past few years. In games like FFXIV, this is most certainly not the case.
WoW enables the behavior of only playing with your guild because the community at large is toxic which is also enabled by the game.
FFXIV has a much stronger community, players greeting each other in cities, sitting down to watch a Bard play video game music on a harp or everyone chatting in party chat through cutscenes in main story dungeons.
There is a sense of community in these games that draws people to them. I think certain groups of people do want to be a part of a large crowd, but not when doing so puts them at risk of being put down like in WoW.
WoW used to have that as well until they made a few community hostile changes. But there probably is a group you interact most with even in FF.
A server-interconnect mod sounds like just the ticket; something that connects servers together into an "internet" of sorts.
Hypixel and other mega servers already do this on their own. I'm sure some sort of irc/matrix implementation would work for interoperability.
The thing is, this was tried already with VRML in the 90s. And that totally flopped, because as it turns out, people would rather not deal with the clunkiness of excess skeuomorphism when they can instead just type in a text box or click on a button. Perhaps actual VR headsets could ease the pain of that, but it would have to be incredibly good for it to be a preferable alternative to just directly producing/consuming the relevant data via text messages, video chats, etc.
On that note, I feel that Microsoft has a better approach here of just "Teams but in VR", a nice simple scope compared to trying to reinvent the entire internet.
On that note, I feel that Microsoft has a better approach here of just "Teams but in VR", a nice simple scope compared to trying to reinvent the entire internet.
It's pretty wild that Meta has gone all-in on this "metaverse" concept when VR as a platform has completely stagnated to date. VR still hasn't found its killer app, why is Meta so convinced that it's going to look like Second Life?
Maybe they know that VR and Second Life may have stagnated but are going nowhere and as tech improves, the "Metaverse" is inevitable? The fact that Second Life is still a thing in 2021 is actually impressive.
VR is as inevitable as "AI".
Hint: we don't actually have anything like the AI you read about in the books in play - they're just algorithms that search patterns.
I expect the same for "VR"
Hint: we don't actually have anything like the AI you read about in the books in play - they're just algorithms that search patterns.
I expect the same for "VR"
Do they know something we don’t?
I think they know how much money they've sunk into their Oculus property and they want to see more return on that investment.
I think this is what a midlife crisis looks like when you have dictatorial control of a multi-billion dollar corporation.
> More specifically, the way we use the web today to navigate from webpage to another is how we we traverse the metaverse. The core problem that needs to get solved right now is interoperability, to enable the "web of 3D".
May be I lack vision, but I'm not able to understand why we need this. What I have realised during lockdown is that I don't want to or can be fully immersed in one thing. I'm always multi-tasking different things on a computer and in a real world around me. Metaverse seems to be opposite of that. So while it was an interesting demo, it felt very unintuitive to me at this point.
May be I lack vision, but I'm not able to understand why we need this. What I have realised during lockdown is that I don't want to or can be fully immersed in one thing. I'm always multi-tasking different things on a computer and in a real world around me. Metaverse seems to be opposite of that. So while it was an interesting demo, it felt very unintuitive to me at this point.
>what is so hard to understand about that for journalists and companies?
They've gotten used to redefining existing words to better fit a desired narrative, a habit picked up from your given tech company marketing department. It's funny that you mention XR, which was itself coined in part to get around Microsoft's co-opting of "mixed reality" (which itself evolved to encompass all forms of n-reality after initially being coined to replace "augmented reality", I believe by Magic Leap). It's a mess.
They've gotten used to redefining existing words to better fit a desired narrative, a habit picked up from your given tech company marketing department. It's funny that you mention XR, which was itself coined in part to get around Microsoft's co-opting of "mixed reality" (which itself evolved to encompass all forms of n-reality after initially being coined to replace "augmented reality", I believe by Magic Leap). It's a mess.
If the web was created today, it would not be a set of open protocols, markup languages, etc. It would be a product. That's the world we live in, so that's why journalists and companies chase that vision.
There's obviously no way to be sure, but the only reason the web was created how it was is because it was a bunch of academics, nerds, and hobbyists who saw a need and filled it. There was no perceived money in it from the private sector's point of view. Now that there's no question that there's money to be made, it's like blood in the water. And the capitalist sharks can smell it.
An open standard that's given away for free isn't attractive to the people who have the means to create it.
There's obviously no way to be sure, but the only reason the web was created how it was is because it was a bunch of academics, nerds, and hobbyists who saw a need and filled it. There was no perceived money in it from the private sector's point of view. Now that there's no question that there's money to be made, it's like blood in the water. And the capitalist sharks can smell it.
An open standard that's given away for free isn't attractive to the people who have the means to create it.
And it was a trade off. I think most of us are well acquainted with the advertised advantages of open standards and web application architecture as we know it. But it came at the expense of both user experience and developer experience on par with traditional desktop applications. E.g. arbitrary languages (esp. compiled languages), fast graphics, great UI toolkits. We get some approximation of such things at a glacial pace, or it’s always just over the horizon. Everybody is leery of adopting a comprehensive framework only backed by a single corporation (is this what held Java back?) but standards bodies take 20 years to deliver a bright idea like compiling your favorite language to byte code that can execute in the browser.
I think you at least get the vision, however I believe the current web standards is what is preventing forward progress. What you describe could be achieved much easier by moving sandboxing into the OS and using containers. I'd much rather see a modern markup format for describing content and data than what we have today. Not 1000x bloated frameworks to do simple things. I believe it we are ever going to make the metaverse a reality we have to really reenvision our current technology not on what we have today by trying to incorporate next gen solutions into a failing model but create something new and expandable that is easy to get started.
It is a current form of the metaverse... and I think that you underestimate how it could evolve... but I sure hope that WebAssembly never takes over.
Plus if it doesn’t look good and have porn it’s no good.
I don't know about porn, but Minecraft has shaders and the very pretty RTX version.
“What is so hard for people to understand” says HN commenter: “the metaverse clearly means [my definition of the metaverse] why can’t people see this?!!”
Well, Zuckerberg didn’t give a clear definition, the term itself is made up, and it doesn’t currently exist (otherwise, what would we be building?).
So no you don’t know what it means or how it will turn out, and neither does Zuckerberg. He might have a vision of what he’d like it to be and how he’s going to make money out of it, but he’s very probably very wrong.
It’s obvious a deeply immersive experience will eventually arrive but it seems far from obvious how it will be used, much like predicting the rise of Tik Tok in 1990 based on email and usenet.
The best way to predict the future is to make it. Hackers built much of the early internet, so let’s go build the early metaverse and at least make something insanely experimental and magical and beautiful before the next Zuckerberg comes alone and devalues it.
Well, Zuckerberg didn’t give a clear definition, the term itself is made up, and it doesn’t currently exist (otherwise, what would we be building?).
So no you don’t know what it means or how it will turn out, and neither does Zuckerberg. He might have a vision of what he’d like it to be and how he’s going to make money out of it, but he’s very probably very wrong.
It’s obvious a deeply immersive experience will eventually arrive but it seems far from obvious how it will be used, much like predicting the rise of Tik Tok in 1990 based on email and usenet.
The best way to predict the future is to make it. Hackers built much of the early internet, so let’s go build the early metaverse and at least make something insanely experimental and magical and beautiful before the next Zuckerberg comes alone and devalues it.
>It’s obvious a deeply immersive experience will eventually arrive
This is like "self driving car" obvious. It seems like we're close, but we're really really not.
This is like "self driving car" obvious. It seems like we're close, but we're really really not.
I think that’s a very good analogy, not least because our incremental steps to self driving cars and similar to our incremental steps towards immersion - we already have some components (parking assist, social media) but there’s still a large gap.
Though there's no problem understanding what a self driving car should be - like an Uber but with no human driver in. The metaverse on the other hand - no one really knows.
Good point! Metaphors fail so easily.
Facebook over the years had several opportunities to buy game studios and become a gaming company themselves.
This metaverse is a VR video game and Facebook has demonstrated zero abilities to make a video game.
I would bet on Minecraft and Fortnite creators to be a better position to create this "metaverse" because they've done this before.
This metaverse is a VR video game and Facebook has demonstrated zero abilities to make a video game.
I would bet on Minecraft and Fortnite creators to be a better position to create this "metaverse" because they've done this before.
Fortnite, yes, almost definitely. Epic is a true leader in videogame technology.
Minecraft, no. Minecraft has failed to truly innovate since Microsoft acquired it, imo. I think the evidence of this is apparent in the existence of both Minecraft Bedrock and Java editions.
The metaverse is about creating the one true videogame. The final videogame. The holodeck where gamers themselves can make new games at a rapid speed.
The Unity Asset Store is actually a treasure trove of value for Unity in this regard. I could see Facebook buying Unity for a massive sum or licensing the engine and asset store somehow to make a play towards this vision of the metaverse.
That is, unless Epic just makes it first.
Minecraft, no. Minecraft has failed to truly innovate since Microsoft acquired it, imo. I think the evidence of this is apparent in the existence of both Minecraft Bedrock and Java editions.
The metaverse is about creating the one true videogame. The final videogame. The holodeck where gamers themselves can make new games at a rapid speed.
The Unity Asset Store is actually a treasure trove of value for Unity in this regard. I could see Facebook buying Unity for a massive sum or licensing the engine and asset store somehow to make a play towards this vision of the metaverse.
That is, unless Epic just makes it first.
My bet is on Valve being the dark horse in this race. Gabe already has expressed interest, they're assisting development on Garry's Mod 2 (s&box), and they have the highest quality VR hardware. They also have consumer trust, everyone with VR has a steam account, they have a method of sharing user-generated content (and making money off of it!) with the workshop. If they can coordinate, they can take off in this area
> “What is so hard for people to understand” says HN commenter: “the metaverse clearly means [my definition of the metaverse] why can’t people see this?!!”
The point of the article is that the metaverse is here and it's decentralized enough that the other 7 billion people that don't care about the opinion of one specific HN commenter are doing their own thing.
The point of the article is that the metaverse is here and it's decentralized enough that the other 7 billion people that don't care about the opinion of one specific HN commenter are doing their own thing.
To be completely honest, I don't really know what people mean when they talk about a "metaverse".
But if I had to define it one way or the other, I feel like I already have, and interact with, a sort of metaverse. I play various video games with various people, talking and interacting with friends for these games on Discord, interacting with the larger community of these games on Discord/Reddit, engaging with influencer communities on Twitch/Youtube, and follow game news on Reddit/Twitter/Youtube/Forums.
In the same vein, I've learned a tremendous amount about computer science, software engineering, job hunting, smaller hobbies, and plenty of other various things through the same set of things that make up my gaming metaverse (Forums/Discord/Youtube/Reddit/HackerNews/etc). It doesn't overlap with the same people I interact with for gaming, but I wouldn't expect the people to overlap much. The platforms are still the same.
And it doesn't really stop there, these are just the two big things I can think of.
So I guess I'm asking, what is the "Metaverse" trying to do? Take what we currently already have, but make it more cohesive? The only other thing I can think of would be a full-dive VR world experience, but I'm fairly sure we aren't even close to that.
But if I had to define it one way or the other, I feel like I already have, and interact with, a sort of metaverse. I play various video games with various people, talking and interacting with friends for these games on Discord, interacting with the larger community of these games on Discord/Reddit, engaging with influencer communities on Twitch/Youtube, and follow game news on Reddit/Twitter/Youtube/Forums.
In the same vein, I've learned a tremendous amount about computer science, software engineering, job hunting, smaller hobbies, and plenty of other various things through the same set of things that make up my gaming metaverse (Forums/Discord/Youtube/Reddit/HackerNews/etc). It doesn't overlap with the same people I interact with for gaming, but I wouldn't expect the people to overlap much. The platforms are still the same.
And it doesn't really stop there, these are just the two big things I can think of.
So I guess I'm asking, what is the "Metaverse" trying to do? Take what we currently already have, but make it more cohesive? The only other thing I can think of would be a full-dive VR world experience, but I'm fairly sure we aren't even close to that.
Why is no one building open standards or protocols anymore? Way back when, there was VRML, which would be a layer on top of the web, and you could jump from site to site but in 3D space instead of underlined links. Yes, VRML failed, but we've had over 20 years and a massive amount of progress since then. Is there any reason the metaverse couldn't be distributed and sit on top of current web standards?
Adoption is the issue, not the lack of open standards.
What are the standards around this? I was unaware of much, if any, recent development on such standards. Even so why is no one with adequate resources working on growing adoption of standards, whether it be academia, DARPA, or corporate entities?
Standards of online networking or the metaverse? Its the internet. You can run 3D crap in a browser.
"you can run crap on nand gates"
Which of these "metaverse" applications don't run online?
There is no standard for a federated or distributed metaverse. I run a server, you run a server, a user enters the world on my server, walks through a portal to your server. How do you represent links/portals? How do you maintain your visual representation across servers? How do you take objects across servers? Is there a realtime communication system? Are there standards around styling? Graceful degredation with weaker hardware or low bandwidth? A non-proprietery object/scene representation format that can be inspected and shared across domains?
What exactly are you arguing against?
What exactly are you arguing against?
He wants an even more addictive version of the "Ready Player One" Oasis but minus the contest to give it away, he wants to ascend.
I think the idea is there is a hub where all of those things are connected and live to some extend. Like if your web browser was basically a mmo experience and when you went to do any of the things you mentioned some type of avatar that represents you would be present doing those things rather than just cookies and network traffic from your computer.
My understanding is its just a way to do all the things you do currently but in a more "connected" way.
My understanding is its just a way to do all the things you do currently but in a more "connected" way.
The gold standard would be the matrix but one that you’re aware you’re in and can leave at any time.
I am pretty sure that the gold standard would be real life. It doesn't require energy or batteries to just exist in real life, unlike the army of devices that will be required to support all this new tech and network infrastructure.
Very odd that on one hand there is a push towards saving the Earth and the carbon crisis, and on the other hand excitement towards technology that lets everyone stick their head in the sand.
Very odd that on one hand there is a push towards saving the Earth and the carbon crisis, and on the other hand excitement towards technology that lets everyone stick their head in the sand.
> and on the other hand excitement towards technology that lets everyone stick their head in the sand.
Well TBF, isn't that what culture has been for since the invention of the first song and story?
Well TBF, isn't that what culture has been for since the invention of the first song and story?
Yeah. The totally lawless environments that can be present in Minecraft servers are awesome- the best example of which being 2b2t, a vanilla gameserver running the same map since 2010 that is essentially the 4chan of Minecraft (it even originated there). Despite allowing users to hack to their hearts' content and having no rules, the creativity and sheer amount of media produced by such an environment is stunning.
Here is a comic series that was made based on the server, and a neat video animation someone created: http://minecraft2b2t.thecomicseries.com/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uEg5UPKPY70
Here is a comic series that was made based on the server, and a neat video animation someone created: http://minecraft2b2t.thecomicseries.com/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uEg5UPKPY70
And it turns out it's been pwned for a couple years by people inserting a vulnerability into a dependency by masterful social engineering where the vuln was introduces as an obvious fix to another less exploitable bug.
I've never seen people social engineer codebase maintainers into patching them an exploit into it, that was absolutely brilliant.
2b2t is a fascinating place. I always thought, this is the way Minecraft is meant to be played.
The comic series is legendary, but I don't think people can make something out of the animation video without context.
The comic series is legendary, but I don't think people can make something out of the animation video without context.
And that is why the "metaverse" will succeed if it's decentralized.
I wouldn't touch a MC server that has no grief prevention. But you can have your 4chan and I can have my builder server and we're both happy. Because there's no central authority telling us how to run our pieces of "metaverse".
I wouldn't touch a MC server that has no grief prevention. But you can have your 4chan and I can have my builder server and we're both happy. Because there's no central authority telling us how to run our pieces of "metaverse".
Maybe someone can make the backend run on a blockchain and it's settled.
The most important fact about Java Minecraft that most people are missing is that long after Notch left the company they started distributing deobfuscation maps for it:
C:\Users\Username\AppData\Roaming\.minecraft\versions\1.17.1\1.17.1.json
Look for: client_mappings & server_mappings
https://launcher.mojang.com/v1/objects/e4d540e0cba05a6097e88...
https://launcher.mojang.com/v1/objects/f6cae1c5c1255f68ba483...
The tricky part is they don't provide deobfuscation tools, so everyone makes their own and it's a mess.
But Minecraft is for all practical purposes open-source since 2018!
Legally you cannot distribute the deobfuscated binaries, so most people map the code.
I would probably use the 1.17.1 as the last "open" minecraft and start a fork that you compile and work with after deobfuscation and then re-obfuscate at each release.
Dunno what the legal team at Microsoft would think about that!
C:\Users\Username\AppData\Roaming\.minecraft\versions\1.17.1\1.17.1.json
Look for: client_mappings & server_mappings
https://launcher.mojang.com/v1/objects/e4d540e0cba05a6097e88...
https://launcher.mojang.com/v1/objects/f6cae1c5c1255f68ba483...
The tricky part is they don't provide deobfuscation tools, so everyone makes their own and it's a mess.
But Minecraft is for all practical purposes open-source since 2018!
Legally you cannot distribute the deobfuscated binaries, so most people map the code.
I would probably use the 1.17.1 as the last "open" minecraft and start a fork that you compile and work with after deobfuscation and then re-obfuscate at each release.
Dunno what the legal team at Microsoft would think about that!
I wouldn't say "for all practical purposes" because one of the practical parts of open source software is the open source licence. It's more like a "source available" project, and only once you've bought it which seems fair enough to me. I'm sure it makes modding much easier which I'm grateful for.
> Dunno what the legal team at Microsoft would think about that!
I’m sure they would think something like “No good deed goes unpunished.”
I’m sure they would think something like “No good deed goes unpunished.”
So apparently I'm not allowed to redistribute the re-obfuscated jar but instead I need to map my changes to be compatible with the official jar. That puts a quick end to my interest in this project... But I still deobfuscated 1.14.4 and 1.17.1 and compared the file additions/removals here: http://move.rupy.se/file/diff.txt
Since I watched the highlights reel mentioned in the article [1] I wonder if there exists sort of a doctrine in recent PR video production to always include a super annoying aspect of choreography to keep people from thinking too long about the actual message.
Here Zuck and friends are trying neurotically to keep their fingertips at 1cm distance at any time. Waving their hands as if they were mockups.
In recent Apple event recordings Tim, Craig and the gang cannot get their feet together like anatomically unchallenged humans would do when standing casually. Always more than shoulder's width apart. I've observed something similar once after a mountain biking contest, got to do something with the saddle.
It's obviously not pleasing to the eye (or is it me?). But I cannot see a compelling reason and I refuse to take this as a coincidence. Why???
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gElfIo6uw4g
Here Zuck and friends are trying neurotically to keep their fingertips at 1cm distance at any time. Waving their hands as if they were mockups.
In recent Apple event recordings Tim, Craig and the gang cannot get their feet together like anatomically unchallenged humans would do when standing casually. Always more than shoulder's width apart. I've observed something similar once after a mountain biking contest, got to do something with the saddle.
It's obviously not pleasing to the eye (or is it me?). But I cannot see a compelling reason and I refuse to take this as a coincidence. Why???
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gElfIo6uw4g
They teach that stuff in business school.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cFLjudWTuGQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cFLjudWTuGQ
That's why you shouldn't watch - or even listen to - someone who's trying to sell you something. You're too likely to be influenced by their acting skills.
Just read the transcript or the summaries in written news.
Just read the transcript or the summaries in written news.
A little OT but related and want to bounce this off HN.
I think we’ve reached a turning point in history and society, aided by lockdowns, where young people spend more time interacting online than IRL. This has major consequences for society and tech.
Young people present themselves to the world primarily through their online persona. The physical world is secondary. To reiterate, what happens online, what is shown and seen online, is more important to them than the same in physical space.
You could probably write a book about the consequences of this (maybe someone has?) but two particularly salient points: (1) if you’re not an onliner then it’s hard for you to understand how the future will look, and (2) your desires are just going to be fundamentally different from other people.
I know from talking to CEOs that those entering the workforce now are most comfortable interacting through Slack and WhatsApp. Physical interactions are sometimes difficult, because people have less experience of it - usually it takes them longer to bond, and more formal social situations are challenging because they’ve not had much practice and to learn the rules governing behaviour in certain physical spaces.
It’s easy for oldies to mock Zuckerberg with his embarrassing meta presentation, and indeed I think his influence is waning (because he’s also out of touch) but for sure the future is going to be driven by people who are living online. Avatars may seem like a 90s throwback but that’s just because of how we conceive of them; the truth is _we already have avatars, they’re just messy and distributed and mostly text based_.
Personally I don’t like this conclusion. I think the physical world is superior in many ways, for example physical activity and exercise are fundamental to wellbeing, and I can’t see that being properly and healthily replicated in the virtual world for a very long time. I think there are more noble and worthwhile goals to be pursued in the physical world. But just because I don’t like it doesn’t mean it ain’t true.
I’ve half a mind to join ‘em, half a mind to go build a log cabin.
I think we’ve reached a turning point in history and society, aided by lockdowns, where young people spend more time interacting online than IRL. This has major consequences for society and tech.
Young people present themselves to the world primarily through their online persona. The physical world is secondary. To reiterate, what happens online, what is shown and seen online, is more important to them than the same in physical space.
You could probably write a book about the consequences of this (maybe someone has?) but two particularly salient points: (1) if you’re not an onliner then it’s hard for you to understand how the future will look, and (2) your desires are just going to be fundamentally different from other people.
I know from talking to CEOs that those entering the workforce now are most comfortable interacting through Slack and WhatsApp. Physical interactions are sometimes difficult, because people have less experience of it - usually it takes them longer to bond, and more formal social situations are challenging because they’ve not had much practice and to learn the rules governing behaviour in certain physical spaces.
It’s easy for oldies to mock Zuckerberg with his embarrassing meta presentation, and indeed I think his influence is waning (because he’s also out of touch) but for sure the future is going to be driven by people who are living online. Avatars may seem like a 90s throwback but that’s just because of how we conceive of them; the truth is _we already have avatars, they’re just messy and distributed and mostly text based_.
Personally I don’t like this conclusion. I think the physical world is superior in many ways, for example physical activity and exercise are fundamental to wellbeing, and I can’t see that being properly and healthily replicated in the virtual world for a very long time. I think there are more noble and worthwhile goals to be pursued in the physical world. But just because I don’t like it doesn’t mean it ain’t true.
I’ve half a mind to join ‘em, half a mind to go build a log cabin.
I agree. There is a more general point that we underestimate that human persons are to a very large extent informational creatures. It's not just young people, look how everyone and their grandma embraced technology once it became easy to use. The world is increasingly informational, people become increasingly rootless and travel and the economy is turning to a vending machine where ubiquitous services deliver most of the things a person needs anywhere in the world. In this world, digital personas and digital property are more permanent than physical possessions. So i expect more of the economy to move to digital assets over time. Zuck is probably realizing that there the opportunity offered from pseudonymous avatars is bigger than the current one which depends on very public, "real names" communications. I think he is right, but i think he is wrong about how much of it he can control.
It’s not either or. These are complementary things. I’ve been extremely online since the mid-90s for example. There’s nothing sinister or world changing here. Online isn’t a separate universe it’s just a part of IRL.
I think you're proving his point beautifully. You've been online since the mid-90s, so you're ~40 or older?
I don't mean to be derogatory, but you sound exactly like an "oldie" who is out of touch as described by the GP.
Zoomers are absolutely spending more time online and less time IRL than previous generations.
I'm only 23 and the difference between my childhood and my younger siblings is massive. They generally prefer to socialize by playing online games with their friends rather than hanging out with them in person, and they do so for hours at a time. I used to go to friends houses to play games. That doesn't seem to happen anymore.
I don't mean to be derogatory, but you sound exactly like an "oldie" who is out of touch as described by the GP.
Zoomers are absolutely spending more time online and less time IRL than previous generations.
I'm only 23 and the difference between my childhood and my younger siblings is massive. They generally prefer to socialize by playing online games with their friends rather than hanging out with them in person, and they do so for hours at a time. I used to go to friends houses to play games. That doesn't seem to happen anymore.
Exactly right, and thank you for “Zoomers” as a better label.
General rule here I think is that if you don’t think there’s a tectonic shift then you need to go talk to the Zoomers.
Who knows how this turns out but I’m pretty sure it’s not something I’m going to feel comfortable with. There are so many implications: how will different facets of being human translate online? How will this affect our health? And perhaps most critically, in an online world there can be an ultimate power in a way impossible IRL
General rule here I think is that if you don’t think there’s a tectonic shift then you need to go talk to the Zoomers.
Who knows how this turns out but I’m pretty sure it’s not something I’m going to feel comfortable with. There are so many implications: how will different facets of being human translate online? How will this affect our health? And perhaps most critically, in an online world there can be an ultimate power in a way impossible IRL
Don't worry you can be an oldie too if your childhood is massively different to your siblings!
You're looking at your younger siblings and I'm looking at my kids. We see different things and honestly I think this is a bit of a moral panic like we saw with rock and roll, comics, TV, video games during my youth, kids playing online games when I was your age and so on.
You're looking at your younger siblings and I'm looking at my kids. We see different things and honestly I think this is a bit of a moral panic like we saw with rock and roll, comics, TV, video games during my youth, kids playing online games when I was your age and so on.
> I think this is a bit of a moral panic
I really hope that's true. How do you reconcile that with, for example, teenage psychological problems and suicides linked to social media usage?
Video games of the past were quite different from today. I feel like the closure of the tight feedback loop, and the sensorial immersiveness are just a fundamental step change.
I really hope that's true. How do you reconcile that with, for example, teenage psychological problems and suicides linked to social media usage?
Video games of the past were quite different from today. I feel like the closure of the tight feedback loop, and the sensorial immersiveness are just a fundamental step change.
Being concerned about specific things where there is actual evidence is absolutely fine.
How old are your kids and what's their behaviour like?
I used my siblings as an example. The impression I get is that behaviour similar to that of my siblings is very common in general.
Btw I do actually feel somewhat like an "oldie" already.
I used my siblings as an example. The impression I get is that behaviour similar to that of my siblings is very common in general.
Btw I do actually feel somewhat like an "oldie" already.
Facebook is a cloner. They were first a Myspace clone. Then they invented the feed, "like" and "share" when Twitter came around with their feed, heart and retweet and "disappearing" stories when Snapchat started and then "reels" when tiktok picked up.
At first Twitter didn't support images and the Facebook feed didn't either. Then Twitter did and the Facebook feed did. Whoop dee doo
There's nothing mysterious about this. Just see what's popular and imagine it blue, boxy, and boring. Congratulations, that's Facebook's next feature.
Even the strategy itself is just a copy of the Bill Gates playbook from the 80s and 90s.
They should have renamed themselves "Derivative" instead
At first Twitter didn't support images and the Facebook feed didn't either. Then Twitter did and the Facebook feed did. Whoop dee doo
There's nothing mysterious about this. Just see what's popular and imagine it blue, boxy, and boring. Congratulations, that's Facebook's next feature.
Even the strategy itself is just a copy of the Bill Gates playbook from the 80s and 90s.
They should have renamed themselves "Derivative" instead
this is what I always thought when playing Minecraft, it’s not just digital legos, even pure vanilla is a living breathing world with day/night cycles, farming, etc, I use a plug-in called Multiverse to connect all of our old worlds together with the current world, so we can go back and use resources we dug up 10 years ago, and it supports a really nice live mapping plugin called dynmap, also built a “meta world” that acts as a go-between to quickly jump to specific builds across various worlds using an “iconic” chunk of the actual build converted to “meta world” materials: http://mc.legacycraft.vip:8123/?worldname=meta&mapname=surfa...
Very nice setup! As a sort of informal successor to dynmap, there's now (or rather since 1.13) also BlueMap [1]. It renders the map in 3D in the browser and you can look sideways at your builds. Truly impressive.
https://www.spigotmc.org/resources/bluemap.83557
The problem with businessmen trying to make a metaverse is its got uncreative people trying to make tools for creative people, and trying to engineer unscalable and impractical cargo cult solutions.
The uncreative part is best seen in how businessmen think you should buy books online by simply emulating, 3d game style, the experience of going to a shopping mall in 1980 and walking the aisles and waiting in line at Waldenbooks. The actual way books are sold online is instead of a very user unfriendly POS terminal based on a 5150 terminal connected to an AS/400, its a pretty and easy to use UI web based point of sale terminal. Essentially Amazon tricked us into doing free labor for them, being our own cashier/salespeople. Gotta admit that's more creative than "put the mall in GTA3 (Edited: more like GTA Vice City, and that was an awesome game LOL) as a map and pretend to visit the mall in 1980" like the businessmen thought online shopping would resemble.
The cargo cult is the businessmen never think thru how to scale and make things work. The main reason it took until 1900 for heavier than air flight was too many of 'those guys' in charge trying to make airplanes by emulating birds. Just make a 747 by packing ground beef around glued together chicken bones and I'm sure it'll eventually fly real well, says the businessmen. Obviously one makes railroad engines by building steam powered fully articulated four legged mining donkeys. Obviously teen socializing using technology will be putting a "Mall Rats" movie map as a level in Doom. (edited: Jetson era portrayal of robot factories, lol.)
Meanwhile I lived thru the 90s 00s where the legacy media, which is finally near dead, decided everything internet and VR was actually bad special effects as an analogy for a LSD trip. Why bother with actually "doing VR" if you could replace all the hardware in a video game console with a acid tab dispenser. I mean, they're not wrong in a sense, but only Hollywood people would have expected/demanded that everyone wants to be high all the time.
The uncreative part is best seen in how businessmen think you should buy books online by simply emulating, 3d game style, the experience of going to a shopping mall in 1980 and walking the aisles and waiting in line at Waldenbooks. The actual way books are sold online is instead of a very user unfriendly POS terminal based on a 5150 terminal connected to an AS/400, its a pretty and easy to use UI web based point of sale terminal. Essentially Amazon tricked us into doing free labor for them, being our own cashier/salespeople. Gotta admit that's more creative than "put the mall in GTA3 (Edited: more like GTA Vice City, and that was an awesome game LOL) as a map and pretend to visit the mall in 1980" like the businessmen thought online shopping would resemble.
The cargo cult is the businessmen never think thru how to scale and make things work. The main reason it took until 1900 for heavier than air flight was too many of 'those guys' in charge trying to make airplanes by emulating birds. Just make a 747 by packing ground beef around glued together chicken bones and I'm sure it'll eventually fly real well, says the businessmen. Obviously one makes railroad engines by building steam powered fully articulated four legged mining donkeys. Obviously teen socializing using technology will be putting a "Mall Rats" movie map as a level in Doom. (edited: Jetson era portrayal of robot factories, lol.)
Meanwhile I lived thru the 90s 00s where the legacy media, which is finally near dead, decided everything internet and VR was actually bad special effects as an analogy for a LSD trip. Why bother with actually "doing VR" if you could replace all the hardware in a video game console with a acid tab dispenser. I mean, they're not wrong in a sense, but only Hollywood people would have expected/demanded that everyone wants to be high all the time.
"it's actually neosvr", "it's actually [insert thing here]"
Maybe it's always been here, perhaps it's just another abstraction or simulation of a perceived reality. One could say that MUD systems are metaverses(metaversi?)
What I would like to see are more decentralized simulation systems with extensive accessibility features
Maybe it's always been here, perhaps it's just another abstraction or simulation of a perceived reality. One could say that MUD systems are metaverses(metaversi?)
What I would like to see are more decentralized simulation systems with extensive accessibility features
Multiplayer virtual worlds have been with us since the beginning. I think there was a multiplayer high fantasy package for the PDP series of minicomputers?
There's a concerted push to foist this buzzword on us either way.
There's a concerted push to foist this buzzword on us either way.
One of my favorite MUDs HellMOO has a lot of references to Snow Crash (the progenitor of the 'metaverse').
[deleted]
That's a funny spelling of "Roblox".
all Roblox games run on servers owned by the Roblox corporation so not really. Minecraft is totally federated, anyone can create their own Minecraft server if they want to. Roblox doesn't release the server software and doesn't let you run your own server, so you can never really own your own space; they own all of the spaces.
Who said something needs to be federated for it to be the metaverse? That's nowhere in the definition.
I'd argue that scifi examples (like Ready Player One) show that it can be proprietary.
I'm not saying it's good to be controlled by one org. Just that the number of orgs controlling the infra has nothing to do with being the metaverse or not.
I'd argue that scifi examples (like Ready Player One) show that it can be proprietary.
I'm not saying it's good to be controlled by one org. Just that the number of orgs controlling the infra has nothing to do with being the metaverse or not.
Raph Koster, for one. https://www.raphkoster.com/2021/09/02/online-world-or-metave...
Why do people cite fictional examples as if they matter at all? Honestly wondering. It's certainly good for imagining the possibilities, but this thread is talking about something that could actually happen.
Facebook itself would be a better example to your point as it's the largest social network.
Facebook itself would be a better example to your point as it's the largest social network.
in the absence of actual examples, fiction can and sometimes does function as thought experimentation. It can be valid, although in this case, I would argue is not, because Ready Player One does not actually offer any real critique of the OASIS or of the metaverse concept generally; in the story, the OASIS is the damsel in distress, not the aggressor.
This is a good point, though the edges are graying there too.
I've been seeing a lot of ads lately for an iOS game (an awful looking game, but that's beside the point) whose major claim to fame in their ads is that you can earn Roblox's Robux by playing. They probably aren't using any sort of federated Roblox "metaverse ecommerce platform" today, they are probably just laundering Robux gift certificates. (I'm not entirely sure, it's not a game I have reason to download as awful and creepy as it appears.)
So there are at least some game spaces they don't own. (Whether or not you agree those are worthwhile game spaces.)
I've been seeing a lot of ads lately for an iOS game (an awful looking game, but that's beside the point) whose major claim to fame in their ads is that you can earn Roblox's Robux by playing. They probably aren't using any sort of federated Roblox "metaverse ecommerce platform" today, they are probably just laundering Robux gift certificates. (I'm not entirely sure, it's not a game I have reason to download as awful and creepy as it appears.)
So there are at least some game spaces they don't own. (Whether or not you agree those are worthwhile game spaces.)
There is a lesser-known part of Minecraft already used by educators:
https://education.minecraft.net/en-us/discover/impact
This is the kind of product I hope for with the Metaverse but will probably never see.
https://education.minecraft.net/en-us/discover/impact
This is the kind of product I hope for with the Metaverse but will probably never see.
Mojang have also cracked down on brands from 2016. "Mojang spokesperson Owen Hill pointed to situations where something like a car company would build or commission an independent developer to build a Minecraft server with specific purpose of advertising a new vehicle." https://venturebeat.com/2016/05/31/microsoft-bans-corporatio...
The Metaverse sounds like a protocol for VR/AR worlds, but I don’t think I read there is any consortium working on such an open protocol. Unless such a protocol already exists?
It was called VRML[0] and was superseded by X3D[1]
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VRML
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X3D
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VRML
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X3D
The article mentions a (discontinued) 3d browser, which would be a necessity probably for any type of metaversial web.
This reminds me of Adobe Atmosphere (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adobe_Atmosphere), which I greatly miss. It was a highlight of my early 2000s.
I remember that! I loved using an avatar that looked like a bush and then hiding in plain sight.
I've been saying for quite some time that the next big thing (for me) would be some kind of hybrid between a virtual coworking space, VRChat and Minecraft. I feel like being in a 3D space is a completly different experience from being on a Discord server for example. I'd love to go build a house with friends, then code a bit with them inside, and then invite a few people in.
When I started having meetings in Workrooms I was shocked by how much less fatiguing it was than a standard VC, even with the Quest hanging off my face.
I also regularly sim race (1-2 hour races on iRacing) in VR and that's a much better experience as it's 3D than just starting at a screen - VR feels like it's reached that critical mass moment where it's not going to fade away as a fad.
I also regularly sim race (1-2 hour races on iRacing) in VR and that's a much better experience as it's 3D than just starting at a screen - VR feels like it's reached that critical mass moment where it's not going to fade away as a fad.
Minecraft is great but to my knowledge you can't make a portal in one Minecraft world to another world, you can't take an object from one Minecraft world to another world, and you can't transit from one simulation to another simulation (all Minecraft worlds run the same simulation: the Minecraft simulation). It's not really a metaverse in that it's not one connected uncoordinated space, it's many separate, instanced spaces. But it does at least let you run your own space. Valheim is more metaverse than minecraft is since you can gather resources in one Valheim server and take them to another, but there's no real security on that and there's no public history so it's not really stable; there's no notion of what's "real". Although I do agree with the framing that something being a metaverse has little to do with head-mounted displays.
The principle being demonstrated here is persistence, and it exists on a spectrum. In a single Minecraft server your inventory is persistent, but across Minecraft servers only your account identity is persistent. In Valheim or Terarria both your account and your inventory is persistent across servers.
Right now the talking heads are trying to sell us a metaverse on the idea that one account could have a persistent inventory between Minecraft and Valheim and Terraria, but anyone who's ever played a game can tell you immediately that this makes no mechanical sense whatsoever (cross-game promotions are common, and welcome (e.g. an Aloy costume in Monster Hunter World for PS4 owners, or Nintendo Amiibo giving you random rewards in various games), but don't involve literally round-tripping your character between games of potentially wildly disparate genres), and anyone who's ever written a piece of software can tell you immediately that this would be an infeasible logistical nightmare to implement.
Right now the talking heads are trying to sell us a metaverse on the idea that one account could have a persistent inventory between Minecraft and Valheim and Terraria, but anyone who's ever played a game can tell you immediately that this makes no mechanical sense whatsoever (cross-game promotions are common, and welcome (e.g. an Aloy costume in Monster Hunter World for PS4 owners, or Nintendo Amiibo giving you random rewards in various games), but don't involve literally round-tripping your character between games of potentially wildly disparate genres), and anyone who's ever written a piece of software can tell you immediately that this would be an infeasible logistical nightmare to implement.
right I agree with all that, I'm not advocating for the idea of moving the content that an item represents from one simulation to another, but the idea that transferring what that thing symbolizes should be considered separate and isn't as easily dismissable. See this comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29086662
You are correct in vanilla minecraft as far as I'm aware, but there are a number of plugins/mods that have been supporting this type of functionality for a while.
Transferring objects from one world to another may not be desirable for a few reasons. This could lead to coupling of world economies where something that is meant to be - intentionally - scarce in one world now finds itself with an overabundance.
there's only one metaverse, and there's only one economy in the metaverse. I'm not advocating that you should be moving game objects between games, that's a distinct concept (and probably not a very useful one). https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29086415
I feel like taking an object from one simulation to another and having different simulations are oposites. Either you have the same simulations and thus objects share behavior, or the simulations are different and the objects are just 3D things.
> taking an object from one simulation to another and having different simulations are oposites
not really, we just have to get into some semiotics here and consider the difference between the signifier and the signified (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signified_and_signifier). In semiotics, a signifier is a physical artifact; the manifestation of something. A physical stop sign, for example. The signified is the concept embodied by a signifier. All of the stop signs in the world correspond to (roughly) the same concept of stopping, but they are separate instances of that concept. Separate signifiers (instances of "stop sign"), all with the same thing signified (the idea that you should stop).
Now in games, we have the notion of the signifier and the signified, too. Let's take an example item from WoW. I'm using this as an example because it's a game I'm familiar with. An item like Staff of Westfall (https://classic.wowhead.com/item=2042/staff-of-westfall) expresses several things. The first thing that it expresses is that it's a weapon so it uses your weapon slot to equip it, and the stat bonus of +5 intellect that gives you additional mana and +11 spirit that gives you mana regeneration. Great, that's nice. Those things can be taken to be the content of the item: its in-simulation properties and effects. But what does the existence of this item signify? The Staff of Westfall can only be obtained by each player exactly once, cannot be traded between players, and can only be obtained by going to The Deadmines, a particular dungeon, and defeating the final boss. Equipping the Staff of Westfall has the effect that it gives you mana and mana regen, but it also communicates something non-mechanical: that the player carrying the Staff of Westfall has gone to the Deadmines and fought and beaten Edwin VanCleef.
Now, can the Staff of Westfall be transferred to another simulation? Yes and no. The signifier, the physical (virtual?) staff can be transferred to another game in some sense. The 3D model can be transferred, the physical appearance of the item can be transferred. But that was always on your computer all along; it's not particularly meaningful. The effects of the item may or may not be transferable; if a game is not the exact simulation that WoW is, what does +5 intellect and +11 spirit mean? The game operator may elect to translate that to some other concept in their game, or they may not. I think this notion of "transfer" is what you're eluding to: the transfer of the signifier. This concept is probably very useless. It's also the concept that people are generally talking about when they talk about the transfer of items between games. I think it has no merit at all.
But there's something else that can be transferred: the thing that ownership of the Staff of Westfall signifies: the concept that the person holding that item has slayed Edwin VanCleef (in WoW). Transferring the Staff of Westfall may not mean transferring the physical model or its attributes, but it may mean something more along the lines of transferring the meaning of what the player has accomplished. Admittedly, I'm not sure why this would be useful or what the applications of such a system would be; what I'm getting at instead is the idea that transferring an asset may mean many things, and that transferring an asset from one simulation to another is not necessarily the opposite.
not really, we just have to get into some semiotics here and consider the difference between the signifier and the signified (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signified_and_signifier). In semiotics, a signifier is a physical artifact; the manifestation of something. A physical stop sign, for example. The signified is the concept embodied by a signifier. All of the stop signs in the world correspond to (roughly) the same concept of stopping, but they are separate instances of that concept. Separate signifiers (instances of "stop sign"), all with the same thing signified (the idea that you should stop).
Now in games, we have the notion of the signifier and the signified, too. Let's take an example item from WoW. I'm using this as an example because it's a game I'm familiar with. An item like Staff of Westfall (https://classic.wowhead.com/item=2042/staff-of-westfall) expresses several things. The first thing that it expresses is that it's a weapon so it uses your weapon slot to equip it, and the stat bonus of +5 intellect that gives you additional mana and +11 spirit that gives you mana regeneration. Great, that's nice. Those things can be taken to be the content of the item: its in-simulation properties and effects. But what does the existence of this item signify? The Staff of Westfall can only be obtained by each player exactly once, cannot be traded between players, and can only be obtained by going to The Deadmines, a particular dungeon, and defeating the final boss. Equipping the Staff of Westfall has the effect that it gives you mana and mana regen, but it also communicates something non-mechanical: that the player carrying the Staff of Westfall has gone to the Deadmines and fought and beaten Edwin VanCleef.
Now, can the Staff of Westfall be transferred to another simulation? Yes and no. The signifier, the physical (virtual?) staff can be transferred to another game in some sense. The 3D model can be transferred, the physical appearance of the item can be transferred. But that was always on your computer all along; it's not particularly meaningful. The effects of the item may or may not be transferable; if a game is not the exact simulation that WoW is, what does +5 intellect and +11 spirit mean? The game operator may elect to translate that to some other concept in their game, or they may not. I think this notion of "transfer" is what you're eluding to: the transfer of the signifier. This concept is probably very useless. It's also the concept that people are generally talking about when they talk about the transfer of items between games. I think it has no merit at all.
But there's something else that can be transferred: the thing that ownership of the Staff of Westfall signifies: the concept that the person holding that item has slayed Edwin VanCleef (in WoW). Transferring the Staff of Westfall may not mean transferring the physical model or its attributes, but it may mean something more along the lines of transferring the meaning of what the player has accomplished. Admittedly, I'm not sure why this would be useful or what the applications of such a system would be; what I'm getting at instead is the idea that transferring an asset may mean many things, and that transferring an asset from one simulation to another is not necessarily the opposite.
> Now, can the Staff of Westfall be transferred to another simulation? Yes and no. The signifier, the physical (virtual?) staff can be transferred to another game in some sense. The 3D model can be transferred, the physical appearance of the item can be transferred. But that was always on your computer all along; it's not particularly meaningful. The effects of the item may or may not be transferable; if a game is not the exact simulation that WoW is, what does +5 intellect and +11 spirit mean? The game operator may elect to translate that to some other concept in their game, or they may not. I think this notion of "transfer" is what you're eluding to.
> But there's something else that can be transferred: the thing that ownership of the Staff of Westfall signifies: the concept that the person holding that item has slayed Edwin VanCleef (in WoW). Transferring the Staff of Westfall may not mean transferring the physical model or its attributes, but it may mean something more along the lines of transferring the meaning of what the player has accomplished. Admittedly, I'm not sure why this would be useful or what the applications of such a system would be; what I'm getting at instead is the idea that transferring an asset may mean many things, and that transferring an asset from one simulation to another is not necessarily the opposite.
What the "ownership of the Staff of Westfall signifies" is a relatively easy problem to solve. In a way, it's a list of achievements. So the only thing you need to do is to link that list of achievements (or facts if you want to be more general) to a centralized or federated identity. That's easy to do. The 3D object is already harder: not all engines render 3D objects the same way. Maybe there's a "3D object standard" like SVG and you could use that. That's maybe not easy, but not the hardest.
You're hinting at the hard part when saying "it's a weapon so it uses your weapon slot to equip it, and the stat bonus of +5 intellect that gives you additional mana and +11 spirit that gives you mana regeneration". If we remove that part, the "usefulness" of the item, the only thing that's left is appearance and signaling. There's no substance. What's a pen without the ability to write? What's a computer without the ability to run programs? What's a car without the ability of moving? This is why I say that taking an object from one simulation to another is not compatible (at the same effort level) with having different simulations.
> But there's something else that can be transferred: the thing that ownership of the Staff of Westfall signifies: the concept that the person holding that item has slayed Edwin VanCleef (in WoW). Transferring the Staff of Westfall may not mean transferring the physical model or its attributes, but it may mean something more along the lines of transferring the meaning of what the player has accomplished. Admittedly, I'm not sure why this would be useful or what the applications of such a system would be; what I'm getting at instead is the idea that transferring an asset may mean many things, and that transferring an asset from one simulation to another is not necessarily the opposite.
What the "ownership of the Staff of Westfall signifies" is a relatively easy problem to solve. In a way, it's a list of achievements. So the only thing you need to do is to link that list of achievements (or facts if you want to be more general) to a centralized or federated identity. That's easy to do. The 3D object is already harder: not all engines render 3D objects the same way. Maybe there's a "3D object standard" like SVG and you could use that. That's maybe not easy, but not the hardest.
You're hinting at the hard part when saying "it's a weapon so it uses your weapon slot to equip it, and the stat bonus of +5 intellect that gives you additional mana and +11 spirit that gives you mana regeneration". If we remove that part, the "usefulness" of the item, the only thing that's left is appearance and signaling. There's no substance. What's a pen without the ability to write? What's a computer without the ability to run programs? What's a car without the ability of moving? This is why I say that taking an object from one simulation to another is not compatible (at the same effort level) with having different simulations.
Your arguments support stating that taking an object from one simulation to another is a conceptually hard, not necessarily impossible. We do not have that compatibility now, but IMHO the word "metaverse" becomes applicable only when (and if) when it includes at least partial compatibility of this sort; that is the difference between separate environments and environments in a shared metaverse.
At first I thought of replying with something like
> "Yes, everything is possible with enough engineering time. My point is that you can easily do horizontal integration (lots of simulations, mostly cosmetic, almost no behavior) or vertical integration (lots of behavior, few simulation). Both of those have a small surface. But if you want the two at the same time, your surface begins to grow rapidly. You have to implement N behaviours for M simulations. That's not impossible of course. But it's hard."
but the more I think about it, the more I think it's wrong. It's not hard, it is impossible, depending on your definition of different simulations.
For example, what would the Staff of Westfall be in a virtual coworking space? Could you beat up people with it? That would make sense, although I'm not sure it would be suited to a virtual coworking space. Let's just hope your colleague doesn't play shooters. Would it make you "smarter" in a way, by increasing the speed of your computer for example? That is starting to be a bit weird. You could have a badge, or title to say that you've slain the boss, this could work. But how about all the generic equipment? The consumable? How would you express a mana potion in your coworking space? Stimulants maybe? But what would they do? WoW is a game where you (can) try to make your virtual character stronger than the others players/NPC. But that's not really how real life works. That's not how a virtual coworking space would work. "mana" doesn't even exists in your virtual coworking space.
And if your solution to that is to establish some base rules that all simulations follow (physics, capable of executing code contained in an object), then at this point all simulations start becoming the same.
A good analogy for that: how would you reconcile the world in people's dream and the real world? The more you want to bring things from one to the other, the more they lose their distinction. I think the key point here is that a "simulation" is not a name you give to something, but a bag of behaviours, expectations, things. When you bring those things from one simulation to the other, they start being the same. Thus my initial point, having diverse simulations and bringing objects between them are two opposing wishes.
> "Yes, everything is possible with enough engineering time. My point is that you can easily do horizontal integration (lots of simulations, mostly cosmetic, almost no behavior) or vertical integration (lots of behavior, few simulation). Both of those have a small surface. But if you want the two at the same time, your surface begins to grow rapidly. You have to implement N behaviours for M simulations. That's not impossible of course. But it's hard."
but the more I think about it, the more I think it's wrong. It's not hard, it is impossible, depending on your definition of different simulations.
For example, what would the Staff of Westfall be in a virtual coworking space? Could you beat up people with it? That would make sense, although I'm not sure it would be suited to a virtual coworking space. Let's just hope your colleague doesn't play shooters. Would it make you "smarter" in a way, by increasing the speed of your computer for example? That is starting to be a bit weird. You could have a badge, or title to say that you've slain the boss, this could work. But how about all the generic equipment? The consumable? How would you express a mana potion in your coworking space? Stimulants maybe? But what would they do? WoW is a game where you (can) try to make your virtual character stronger than the others players/NPC. But that's not really how real life works. That's not how a virtual coworking space would work. "mana" doesn't even exists in your virtual coworking space.
And if your solution to that is to establish some base rules that all simulations follow (physics, capable of executing code contained in an object), then at this point all simulations start becoming the same.
A good analogy for that: how would you reconcile the world in people's dream and the real world? The more you want to bring things from one to the other, the more they lose their distinction. I think the key point here is that a "simulation" is not a name you give to something, but a bag of behaviours, expectations, things. When you bring those things from one simulation to the other, they start being the same. Thus my initial point, having diverse simulations and bringing objects between them are two opposing wishes.
> what would the Staff of Westfall be in a virtual coworking space? Could you beat up people with it?
You’re still limiting the question to the plane of content: the object’s physical (virtual) characteristics.
Consider the staff as it exists in the plane of expression: what is the person expressing by displaying the item? It would express that you play WoW, are an Alliance player, and play a caster of some sort. That might be a valuable ice breaker or conversation starter; a thing that helps people identify a shared experience or facet of their shared identity.
You have to see through the object’s simulated characteristics and into what the object’s existence means for it to have value. If the object doesn’t mean anything, then there’s not much point in moving it from space to space.
You’re still limiting the question to the plane of content: the object’s physical (virtual) characteristics.
Consider the staff as it exists in the plane of expression: what is the person expressing by displaying the item? It would express that you play WoW, are an Alliance player, and play a caster of some sort. That might be a valuable ice breaker or conversation starter; a thing that helps people identify a shared experience or facet of their shared identity.
You have to see through the object’s simulated characteristics and into what the object’s existence means for it to have value. If the object doesn’t mean anything, then there’s not much point in moving it from space to space.
> If the object doesn’t mean anything, then there’s not much point in moving it from space to space.
Again, that's if you consider that the only value that exists is showing and signaling. That's, in my opinion, a really limited view of things. Objets are not just here to mean something, but also to do something. In fact, that's the main point of most objects. If your objects are only here because they mean something, they could very well just be a list of facts. Linking a list of facts to your identity, even if it's decentralized, is trivial. But it's not the everything you can do. I have a pickaxe in Minecraft. If I could use it to break rock in <cool metaverse stuff>, that would be great. If I can just show a pickaxe, what's the point of the pickaxe?
Again, that's if you consider that the only value that exists is showing and signaling. That's, in my opinion, a really limited view of things. Objets are not just here to mean something, but also to do something. In fact, that's the main point of most objects. If your objects are only here because they mean something, they could very well just be a list of facts. Linking a list of facts to your identity, even if it's decentralized, is trivial. But it's not the everything you can do. I have a pickaxe in Minecraft. If I could use it to break rock in <cool metaverse stuff>, that would be great. If I can just show a pickaxe, what's the point of the pickaxe?
The whole thread is that taking an object from one simulation to another is not really the opposite of having distinct simulations: it just forces us to reconcile with what an object is.
The only way you can have separate simulations is if a person can define their own simulation. If you can't define "I won't let you bonk your coworkers on the head with a stick" then you're not in control of your simulation; you're not defining your own simulation, you're just running another instance of some agreed-upon single simulation. At that point, those are the same simulation. So a person setting up a space has to be free to define the behaviors of the objects in that space, otherwise it's not really their simulation.
If you take an object from one simulation to another, and it does not behave the same way in the two simulations, they're still the same object.
> Objets are not just here to mean something, but also to do something.
The fact that they do something does not identify them as objects. A pickaxe in Minecraft doesn't truly break anything. It plays a sound and deletes a cube. If you're in creative mode in Minecraft, it doesn't even increment your inventory. You can also delete a cube in a voxel editor like Magica Voxel. Is the pickaxe in your Minecraft game the same object as the delete button in Magica Voxel? Is the pickaxe in your Minecraft game the same object as the pickaxe in my Minecraft game? Obviously no. They all do the same thing, but they're not the same object.
The only thing necessary to satisfy "moving an object from one simulation to another" is that they be provably of one distinct identity and not be duplicable.
The only way you can have separate simulations is if a person can define their own simulation. If you can't define "I won't let you bonk your coworkers on the head with a stick" then you're not in control of your simulation; you're not defining your own simulation, you're just running another instance of some agreed-upon single simulation. At that point, those are the same simulation. So a person setting up a space has to be free to define the behaviors of the objects in that space, otherwise it's not really their simulation.
If you take an object from one simulation to another, and it does not behave the same way in the two simulations, they're still the same object.
> Objets are not just here to mean something, but also to do something.
The fact that they do something does not identify them as objects. A pickaxe in Minecraft doesn't truly break anything. It plays a sound and deletes a cube. If you're in creative mode in Minecraft, it doesn't even increment your inventory. You can also delete a cube in a voxel editor like Magica Voxel. Is the pickaxe in your Minecraft game the same object as the delete button in Magica Voxel? Is the pickaxe in your Minecraft game the same object as the pickaxe in my Minecraft game? Obviously no. They all do the same thing, but they're not the same object.
The only thing necessary to satisfy "moving an object from one simulation to another" is that they be provably of one distinct identity and not be duplicable.
> The only thing necessary to satisfy "moving an object from one simulation to another" is that they be provably of one distinct identity and not be duplicable.
That would mean that you don't have money. Many objects are fungible. If our two pickaxes have the same properties (same name, enchantements, durability, material), then they are the same. A big part of our experience in the world is fungible. Most of the time when I want a pen I only want to be able to write on paper. I don't care if it's your pen or my pen or anything like this.
That would mean that you don't have money. Many objects are fungible. If our two pickaxes have the same properties (same name, enchantements, durability, material), then they are the same. A big part of our experience in the world is fungible. Most of the time when I want a pen I only want to be able to write on paper. I don't care if it's your pen or my pen or anything like this.
nothing I said precludes the ability to also transfer money, so I'm really not sure what you're getting at there.
My argument probably is that establishing some base rules that all simulations follow and some interchange standards is the key part of the metaverse concept. If you don't have that, then you have x separate unconnected "universes", but you can talk about a metaverse only if you have linked them in some ways.
You go in a lot of detail about the "Staff of Westfall" topic which rises some very hard problems, but not all of them need to be solved for a "minimum viable metaverse" (and perhaps not all of them should be solved - likely the optimal spot is somewhere in the middle between those two opposing wishes) - however, there's nothing metaverse-like until we do at least the basics of such connections e.g. ability to link and/or transfers of users, names/identities/aliases and at least some aspects of avatars; and in the case if two simulations are sufficiently similar and want to interoperate, then developing common standards to enable that avatar/item transfer.
Like, it's okay for a particular simulation to have a rule "custom hats are okay, but magic staffs have to stay outside" - but then it needs a protocol that allows them to separate different "accessories" of incoming avatars. And it's okay for a particular simulation (e.g. a virtual conference setup) to have a rule "magic staffs are only decorative items here", but then it needs a technical process to obtain the visual aspects of that staff so that it can properly display it with the new avatar - the simulation might be very different (VR, different styles of 3d vs 2d environment vs perhaps textual representation), so such standards are nontrivial but necessary to have a connected metaverse. (If we want to have it. Myself, I'm not so sure, but some people definitely do)
And if a simulation wants to allow the items inside but have a transformation to fit their specific mechanics - or even transform meaningful items to fit their theme (e.g. a space opera rpg representing the "Staff of Westfall" as a lightsaber) then there should be a standard for that "receiving simulation" to obtain the relevant attributes of that staff so that it can make that transformation, then they should not have to implement a different technical integration for every other simulation, that should be part of the metaverse standards.
You go in a lot of detail about the "Staff of Westfall" topic which rises some very hard problems, but not all of them need to be solved for a "minimum viable metaverse" (and perhaps not all of them should be solved - likely the optimal spot is somewhere in the middle between those two opposing wishes) - however, there's nothing metaverse-like until we do at least the basics of such connections e.g. ability to link and/or transfers of users, names/identities/aliases and at least some aspects of avatars; and in the case if two simulations are sufficiently similar and want to interoperate, then developing common standards to enable that avatar/item transfer.
Like, it's okay for a particular simulation to have a rule "custom hats are okay, but magic staffs have to stay outside" - but then it needs a protocol that allows them to separate different "accessories" of incoming avatars. And it's okay for a particular simulation (e.g. a virtual conference setup) to have a rule "magic staffs are only decorative items here", but then it needs a technical process to obtain the visual aspects of that staff so that it can properly display it with the new avatar - the simulation might be very different (VR, different styles of 3d vs 2d environment vs perhaps textual representation), so such standards are nontrivial but necessary to have a connected metaverse. (If we want to have it. Myself, I'm not so sure, but some people definitely do)
And if a simulation wants to allow the items inside but have a transformation to fit their specific mechanics - or even transform meaningful items to fit their theme (e.g. a space opera rpg representing the "Staff of Westfall" as a lightsaber) then there should be a standard for that "receiving simulation" to obtain the relevant attributes of that staff so that it can make that transformation, then they should not have to implement a different technical integration for every other simulation, that should be part of the metaverse standards.
I think at this point we basically agree on most things. The only differences might be on what is an "ideal multiverse", what would be a "mvp multiverse", and what it means for two simulations to be different.
Maybe, that is just what it should be. Maybe this is the way these things will actually work. The internet itself works, in big part, because it sides with federation over persistence.
It's Croquet. Which was Alan Kay building the metaverse -- as a mere stepping stone to his real goal which always was to build the Young Lady's Illustrated Primer from The Diamond Age.
Kind of a cringe video. Zuckerberg doing a convincing impression of Data from Star Trek. It's like that episode where Data tries to understand human emotions, and only succeeds in vaguely faking a smile. Except this time he wants to build a virtual world for humans. But he doesn't understand it's limited by his android brain's concept of what humans are.
Isn't the Metaverse(tm) really just 2nd Life given a second life?
2nd Life is still out there. I say s someone who was invited to (and attended) a 2nd Life based event during lockdown. I also was invited to a bunch of similar virtual events on the 100 competitors that seemed to spring up.
Roblox and Minecraft are great examples of what Metaverses could be. I think that is largely the appeal for many players.
> Mojang thus far hasn’t built microtransactions
He must have a different Minecraft. Minecraft on xbox has a shop for skins and plugins and all kind of stuff right on the very first menu you see. It even has some kind of daily deal. It has its own funny money currency system. (Google "minecoins")
He must have a different Minecraft. Minecraft on xbox has a shop for skins and plugins and all kind of stuff right on the very first menu you see. It even has some kind of daily deal. It has its own funny money currency system. (Google "minecoins")
I think the author is talking about "in-world" microtransactions. The Xbox (really, Bedrock edition) marketplace exists outside of your world. You have to leave the world to go there, even though you can use items purchased there in-world.
I want a single contiguous Minecraft world that everyone can use.
Each account could get a range of blocks allocated to them, after Credit Card validation, to prove you're a real person.
You could pay to own some more blocks.
The blocks you get are just a land grab.
You can trade blocks you own for blocks someone else owns, and there could be a monetary transaction to go with it.
You can build what you want to on your blocks.
How does all of this pay for itself? We set up Pay To Download blocks. If you want to fly around my creation, you can, and it just costs a little bit to do it.
For the blocks I control, my Server lets me make permanent changes to those blocks. I can let other people on my Server, and I can give them permission to help me make changes to those blocks. We can make a shared Access Control List, and pool our blocks together, and edit them together.
If you visit my area, you're using some Server to do it, and you can be on the same Server as your group of friends. And y'all can make a Copy-On-Write set of modifications to my blocks. And those blocks will stay, as long as your Server caches them. But no one else sees your changes.
Maybe add some minor annual fee to blocks, so that if someone abandons their blocks, that they fall back to the public domain.
If you want to get fancy, you allow block owners to set up royalties for visiting, and clients can set some rate limiters for how much they'll pay, and etc.
I get that Minecraft itself has licensing terms that prevent us from doing this, and especially if money changes hands. I get that people build things that infringe copyright, and the only reason it's tolerated is because money isn't changing hands. I get that if someone hosts this, they'll have to deal with DMCA copyright teardown notices, and etc. And I get that it's not like the true Metaverse where you randomly bump into people you don't know, and can make permanent changes to the world together.
But I just think it's bizarre that someone will make a really cool Minecraft map, and I can't explore it, even if I have money and I'm willing to pay a bit.
If this whole system came with the ability to click a URL to immediately appear in some blocks? I mean, I just think that would be so cool.
Okay, I saved my idea, and hopefully someone will implement something like it.
Each account could get a range of blocks allocated to them, after Credit Card validation, to prove you're a real person.
You could pay to own some more blocks.
The blocks you get are just a land grab.
You can trade blocks you own for blocks someone else owns, and there could be a monetary transaction to go with it.
You can build what you want to on your blocks.
How does all of this pay for itself? We set up Pay To Download blocks. If you want to fly around my creation, you can, and it just costs a little bit to do it.
For the blocks I control, my Server lets me make permanent changes to those blocks. I can let other people on my Server, and I can give them permission to help me make changes to those blocks. We can make a shared Access Control List, and pool our blocks together, and edit them together.
If you visit my area, you're using some Server to do it, and you can be on the same Server as your group of friends. And y'all can make a Copy-On-Write set of modifications to my blocks. And those blocks will stay, as long as your Server caches them. But no one else sees your changes.
Maybe add some minor annual fee to blocks, so that if someone abandons their blocks, that they fall back to the public domain.
If you want to get fancy, you allow block owners to set up royalties for visiting, and clients can set some rate limiters for how much they'll pay, and etc.
I get that Minecraft itself has licensing terms that prevent us from doing this, and especially if money changes hands. I get that people build things that infringe copyright, and the only reason it's tolerated is because money isn't changing hands. I get that if someone hosts this, they'll have to deal with DMCA copyright teardown notices, and etc. And I get that it's not like the true Metaverse where you randomly bump into people you don't know, and can make permanent changes to the world together.
But I just think it's bizarre that someone will make a really cool Minecraft map, and I can't explore it, even if I have money and I'm willing to pay a bit.
If this whole system came with the ability to click a URL to immediately appear in some blocks? I mean, I just think that would be so cool.
Okay, I saved my idea, and hopefully someone will implement something like it.
> You could pay to own some more blocks.
Let's bring wealth-gaps to the metaverse, what could go wrong ;)
Let's bring wealth-gaps to the metaverse, what could go wrong ;)
I was also advocating that people be able to make money by creating content that people visit.
Perhaps schools can hand out blocks for citizenship, and for things like the Duke of Edinburgh Award, for time volunteering at an animal shelter or senior center.
If you have ideas for how to "solve" the wealth gap, I'm all ears. Until then, I'm kind of stuck in that as a framework for how to solve problems.
Perhaps schools can hand out blocks for citizenship, and for things like the Duke of Edinburgh Award, for time volunteering at an animal shelter or senior center.
If you have ideas for how to "solve" the wealth gap, I'm all ears. Until then, I'm kind of stuck in that as a framework for how to solve problems.
That's quite a good idea, actually.
I usually don't like slippery slope arguments, but I wonder how slim the margin is between "hand out blocks for time volunteering at an animal shelter" and "if you don't behave how we want you to you don't get anything" aka. some form of social credit system.
But if it truly is used for good things that sounds very promising. I also like your idea of micropayments, so just people getting paid in the background when others visit or use their creations, sounds like a thing NFTs could achieve.
I usually don't like slippery slope arguments, but I wonder how slim the margin is between "hand out blocks for time volunteering at an animal shelter" and "if you don't behave how we want you to you don't get anything" aka. some form of social credit system.
But if it truly is used for good things that sounds very promising. I also like your idea of micropayments, so just people getting paid in the background when others visit or use their creations, sounds like a thing NFTs could achieve.
It's not like wealth-gaps will be left outside of any realistic metaverse (especially one made by FB, but not only that). If people treat it seriously, then it becomes linked with all the real world factors, and wealth is obviously one of those.
> It's not like wealth-gaps will be left outside of any realistic metaverse
Unfortunately, yeah. Would've been a chance to at least make it better virtually than how we handle these issues in real life, but I think humans will take their flaws with them wherever they go and whatever they do.
Unfortunately, yeah. Would've been a chance to at least make it better virtually than how we handle these issues in real life, but I think humans will take their flaws with them wherever they go and whatever they do.
I saw an article years back about MMO gold farmers, I think in Mexico. They sat in an air-conditioned room, and the wages were decent - they liked the job.
If we can transfer wealth from people who have money but not time, to people somewhere else in the world, who have time but not money, then I'm calling that a good thing.
If we can transfer wealth from people who have money but not time, to people somewhere else in the world, who have time but not money, then I'm calling that a good thing.
I downloaded an RPG last week and played it for 20hrs since then because it was so good.
If I can earn my wage by slaying skeletons, searching for rare flowers or hunting some virtual deers then sign me up I guess. Although I wonder how fast it would get boring, you know, because of that whole "If transform your hobby into your job it can get boring pretty quickly"-thing.
If I can earn my wage by slaying skeletons, searching for rare flowers or hunting some virtual deers then sign me up I guess. Although I wonder how fast it would get boring, you know, because of that whole "If transform your hobby into your job it can get boring pretty quickly"-thing.
My desperate hope is that we end up paying people for creative content. Not grinding.
I used to play D&D with a group of 8. We took turns being DM, but none of us were all that great at it. Well, picture how much we would pay to have someone else be our DM. $10 an hour? Could easily change someone's life, depending on the part of the world.
Picture mini games that are engaging.
Picture interacting with an NPC that has rich conversation trees. At some point, it's a novel or better.
I dunno, man, I hope we do a good job of rewarding creative people in the future, because I can't see how the value of manual labor will be above $0. Robots will replace everything that's not creative, and a lot of things that are.
I used to play D&D with a group of 8. We took turns being DM, but none of us were all that great at it. Well, picture how much we would pay to have someone else be our DM. $10 an hour? Could easily change someone's life, depending on the part of the world.
Picture mini games that are engaging.
Picture interacting with an NPC that has rich conversation trees. At some point, it's a novel or better.
I dunno, man, I hope we do a good job of rewarding creative people in the future, because I can't see how the value of manual labor will be above $0. Robots will replace everything that's not creative, and a lot of things that are.
If you feel handicapped now without your cell phone, just imagine what's going to happen when you lose/break your AR headset you wear everywhere (hopefully except when sleep) or when the bionic implant Elon plugged into your brain stops working. Pay up peasant.
its actually roblox
Indeed. All my kids went through a huge Minecraft obsession along with their friends but have all now moved on to Roblox. They find the "games" more entertaining to build and play now. It's become the social hang-out just to chat with friends as well. The Roblox VR experience is pretty fun too.
My only problem with Roblox is that it's not on the Switch and they all want better tablets and computers to play it now.
My only problem with Roblox is that it's not on the Switch and they all want better tablets and computers to play it now.
I thought Roblox was what kids play before they 'graduate' to Minecraft?
I think it's more a generational thing. If Gen X grew up on arcades and the Atari (guessing), and Millennials on games like Quake or NES games, then Gen Z grew up on Minecraft and Gen Alpha on Roblox.
Until VR technology gets better I probably don't think kids will grow up on it because I can't imagine headsets being safe to use for extended periods of time if you're under 10 years old.
Until VR technology gets better I probably don't think kids will grow up on it because I can't imagine headsets being safe to use for extended periods of time if you're under 10 years old.
> I can't imagine headsets being safe to use for extended periods of time if you're under 10 years old.
Oops. Well the only reason my kids play as much Roblox as they do is only because I don't let them play the Quest2 all day. They would if they could. (Especially the 8yo)
RecRoom is a really well done VR Roblox and my kids would live there if they could. I think we'll see a generation of kids with high interest and expectations of VR.
Oops. Well the only reason my kids play as much Roblox as they do is only because I don't let them play the Quest2 all day. They would if they could. (Especially the 8yo)
RecRoom is a really well done VR Roblox and my kids would live there if they could. I think we'll see a generation of kids with high interest and expectations of VR.
Does Minecraft go down for several days like Roblox does?
Does Minecraft ban/cancel people like PewDiePie as Roblox did?
Aren't monthly active users (MAU) around 100M for each?
I think Roblox is eventually doomed to slowly fizzle like Second Life, etc. Internet history is littered with the corpses of dead closed systems. Remember Compuserve, Prodigy, and AOL? Remember Myspace?
Microsoft might eventually, say, install mandatory AI inside Minecraft that forces all players to behaviorally conform to the social and political views of the most vocal group of Microsoft employees. Then some other immersive 3D world builder with more open rules of participation will send Minecraft to its grave.
Does Minecraft ban/cancel people like PewDiePie as Roblox did?
Aren't monthly active users (MAU) around 100M for each?
I think Roblox is eventually doomed to slowly fizzle like Second Life, etc. Internet history is littered with the corpses of dead closed systems. Remember Compuserve, Prodigy, and AOL? Remember Myspace?
Microsoft might eventually, say, install mandatory AI inside Minecraft that forces all players to behaviorally conform to the social and political views of the most vocal group of Microsoft employees. Then some other immersive 3D world builder with more open rules of participation will send Minecraft to its grave.
Mojang would have a problem trying to control Minecraft because it's written in Java, their developers commonly associate with the players who hack the game, and the only control over the gameservers that they have is their authentication servers- which you can disable the use of by editing one flag in your server config files, allowing anyone to play even if they didn't buy the game.
This describes the current state of Minecraft, but Microsoft can tie new releases to new restrictions. The unknowing masses will adopt the new version without understanding the loss of freedom. Look at the success MS, Adobe, etc., have had getting people to pay rent each month for software like Office and Photoshop that they used to buy once and run forever.
Modded players already are decoupled from the current version.
For a while everything interesting was stuck on 1.7 so while Microsoft may have shipped 1.8, and 1.9 nobody of consequence played those in the modded scene.
Even today, the newer Minecraft versions are only used for very experimental packs. Something mainstream is on 1.12 while Microsoft have already begun shipping 1.19
Because of this, you have for many years been able to pick which version of Minecraft is started, new versions don't overwrite old ones.
For a while everything interesting was stuck on 1.7 so while Microsoft may have shipped 1.8, and 1.9 nobody of consequence played those in the modded scene.
Even today, the newer Minecraft versions are only used for very experimental packs. Something mainstream is on 1.12 while Microsoft have already begun shipping 1.19
Because of this, you have for many years been able to pick which version of Minecraft is started, new versions don't overwrite old ones.
This freedom to use old versions sounds good. But of Minecraft's 100M+ users, what percentage know this? What percentage just automatically update to the newest version and don't explore the mod scene?
I just read that Mojang added no opt-out telemetry to version 21w38a.[1]
How many Minecrafters are savvy enough to understand that this happened, and the long-term implications?
I initially tried to follow guides and "mods" to disable Win 10 telemetry but eventually gave up because MS changes how telemetry is disabled with every single update.
[1] https://github.com/kb-1000/no-telemetry
I just read that Mojang added no opt-out telemetry to version 21w38a.[1]
How many Minecrafters are savvy enough to understand that this happened, and the long-term implications?
I initially tried to follow guides and "mods" to disable Win 10 telemetry but eventually gave up because MS changes how telemetry is disabled with every single update.
[1] https://github.com/kb-1000/no-telemetry
I mean, I don't know what fraction of that 100M users are Java Minecraft. Obviously Bedrock is entirely up to Microsoft, they can do whatever they want in their sandbox and I'm sure most 5 year olds don't care either way.
On Java Minecraft, which is the only way you can seriously modify the game - I haven't actually run the out-of-box experience for many years, but unless it changed you just pick the version you want from a GUI.
If you play modded more than a tiny "dip my toe in it" amount you run dedicated "launcher" software (I run MultiMC) and that takes responsibility for managing a whole bunch of exciting problems, each of your Mod packs probably expects to live in a separate Minecraft environment, with a specific version of the game, it needs to track whether the Java parameters are special (e.g. more heap, different garbage collection prefs) some people prefer to play some packs in a different screen resolution.
One of the very strange things for a few years was that Twitch (yes, that one) managed this stuff for a lot of players. You've got the Twitch.tv app, which people use to watch say, Ninja playing Fortnite, and there's a tab in there for mods, and then a tab inside that for Minecraft, and that's a valid modded Minecraft launcher. It made some sort of sense because one of the few long term audiences on Twitch is Minecraft, so while there may never be more Minecraft audiences than there are people watching this week's hot new game, by next year that game is irrelevant and the same audience is still watching Minecraft. The tie-in deal that caused this eventually went away though.
On Java Minecraft, which is the only way you can seriously modify the game - I haven't actually run the out-of-box experience for many years, but unless it changed you just pick the version you want from a GUI.
If you play modded more than a tiny "dip my toe in it" amount you run dedicated "launcher" software (I run MultiMC) and that takes responsibility for managing a whole bunch of exciting problems, each of your Mod packs probably expects to live in a separate Minecraft environment, with a specific version of the game, it needs to track whether the Java parameters are special (e.g. more heap, different garbage collection prefs) some people prefer to play some packs in a different screen resolution.
One of the very strange things for a few years was that Twitch (yes, that one) managed this stuff for a lot of players. You've got the Twitch.tv app, which people use to watch say, Ninja playing Fortnite, and there's a tab in there for mods, and then a tab inside that for Minecraft, and that's a valid modded Minecraft launcher. It made some sort of sense because one of the few long term audiences on Twitch is Minecraft, so while there may never be more Minecraft audiences than there are people watching this week's hot new game, by next year that game is irrelevant and the same audience is still watching Minecraft. The tie-in deal that caused this eventually went away though.
Mojang can control their Minecraft, one of the strengths of Minecraft is that everyone can have their own.
But then you have absolutely no authentication whatsoever. So anyone can join your server using any player name and it's difficult to effectively ban. Good maybe for small private servers, but won't work for anything public. Also IIRC then you get no user-selected player skins.
> But then you have absolutely no authentication whatsoever.
There are other ways. For a while, I played on a private Minecraft server which disabled authentication (for reasons; that server also had the mod which allows Bedrock players to connect to a Java server, which probably played a part). However, once you connected to that server, you had 30 seconds to type a command with a password, otherwise you'd be kicked out, and before entering that command, the player is frozen and has no access to the inventory. The closest analogue is IRC's NickServ.
That server also had a way to allow everyone to use their own user-selected player skins, even without authenticating to the skin servers, though I don't know the details on how that worked.
There are other ways. For a while, I played on a private Minecraft server which disabled authentication (for reasons; that server also had the mod which allows Bedrock players to connect to a Java server, which probably played a part). However, once you connected to that server, you had 30 seconds to type a command with a password, otherwise you'd be kicked out, and before entering that command, the player is frozen and has no access to the inventory. The closest analogue is IRC's NickServ.
That server also had a way to allow everyone to use their own user-selected player skins, even without authenticating to the skin servers, though I don't know the details on how that worked.
FWIW Roblox was created in '04 and launched in '06, Myspace peaked '05-'09.
Last year they were trying to hype XR (eXtended Reality). I guess that didn't fly and now they're trying to see if Metaverse will interest the target market.
Kids will love it for sure. It is indeed Minecraft, but with different/better graphics.
Kids will love it for sure. It is indeed Minecraft, but with different/better graphics.
The metaverse.. Made to make prople forget that they cant afford that resource getting scarce: space.
Escaping from the narrowness of a shitty appartment into the constriction of a vrheadset... Appealing.
Escaping from the narrowness of a shitty appartment into the constriction of a vrheadset... Appealing.
People have too much of dopamine rush from the ordinary social media to get engaged in such complex projects. Second Life was an expection created in times where there was no social media and people were looking for alternative ways to pass time and were willing to invest their time in learning how to use Second Life (it is a quite complex creation tool and game client at the same time).
What Second Life is missing is the decentralization and newer graphic/scripting engine. Creator of Second Life already tried to create VR metaverse with those issues solved and it didn't catch on.
I was wondering recently if it might be possible with today's GPU hardware to create a Minecraft-like world with similar dynamics but with fully simulated physics across the entire world. In Minecraft terms this would be a global simulation "tick" that allowed things like gravity to work, more sophisticated creature behaviors to play out globally, etc.
The neosvr team is doing just that with the open source bepu physics engine :D
Interesting, but I was thinking of something simpler than a full on physics engine. Simulate a whole Minecraft-style voxel world like a big 3D cellular automaton with N states where N is the number of block types. Algorithms similar to HashLife may help:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hashlife
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hashlife
Looks like they abandoned that approach in 2019 with bepuphysics2 - https://www.bepuentertainment.com/blog/2019/1/16/-but-gpus-a...
I've been blown away by the explosion of "urlfest" concerts teenagers have been running on Minecraft during shutdown. A ton of really good music because everyone was stuck inside and needed something to do (digicore / hyperpop blew up last year).
True but of minor importance. The idea of a social network wasn't invented by FB, and it worked out well - so far - for it and its shareholders.
The metaverse doesn't have to be Zuck's. He only needs to time the wave, with a pinch of wave self-creation obviously.
The metaverse doesn't have to be Zuck's. He only needs to time the wave, with a pinch of wave self-creation obviously.
The only reason Minecraft doesn't have microtransactions is because they haven't gotten around to it yet. I recently interviewed for a position on the team that's going to make it happen.
Bedrock edition already has microtransactions. Unlike what many JE players think you can still download resource packs, skins, maps, etc off the intend instead of the marketplace.
Some people spent decades in Ultima Online and WOW. Ask them how that went.
Metaverse it's only a marketing label. It has been here forever.
meta (adjective)
pertaining to or noting a story, conversation, character, etc., that consciously references or comments upon its own subject or features, often in the form of parody
-------------
It's obvious to me that the real reason they called it "Meta" is because the entire goal is to collect information about YOU, the user. It's an entire platform and suite of products designed to extract as much "meta" information about its users as possible, and then monetize that information.
pertaining to or noting a story, conversation, character, etc., that consciously references or comments upon its own subject or features, often in the form of parody
-------------
It's obvious to me that the real reason they called it "Meta" is because the entire goal is to collect information about YOU, the user. It's an entire platform and suite of products designed to extract as much "meta" information about its users as possible, and then monetize that information.
No, it's not. Minecraft is just a single game. If you could teleport between Second Life and Minecraft, then we could start talking about multiverse.
I think Minecraft is a really good influence for people wishing to build a metaverse but Minecraft is too limited and Mojang has too much control over it.
So at the end of the day any virtual world is metaverse? Video games' worlds like the ones of Minecraft, Roblox, World of Warcraft etc.
Something with only voxels (blocks) can never be a great metaverse in my opinion. You need more general geometry - such as triangles. Have you ever tried to model a sphere or a smoothly curved surface in voxels?
Allowing arbitrary triangle meshes is technically harder to implement for various reasons (more data, harder physics, harder for artists to create).
But I think it's worth it. I allow arbitrary user geometry in my metaverse - https://substrata.info/
Allowing arbitrary triangle meshes is technically harder to implement for various reasons (more data, harder physics, harder for artists to create).
But I think it's worth it. I allow arbitrary user geometry in my metaverse - https://substrata.info/
Dumb question: Is 'metaverse' (as Meta wants to use it) in some sense born generic in Trademark/IP terms?
The Metaverse that will make the most $ is Porn
That is often considered the primary reason VHS beat out the arguably superior tech of Betamax: one was willing to license to porn and the other preferred not to.
Definitely a lesson for any would be "metaverse" to keep in mind.
Definitely a lesson for any would be "metaverse" to keep in mind.
I have not played Minecraft, my son does but I think that Metaversa is more closer to the Matrix movie instead of Minecraft.
I thought is was already here... Fallout 76...
Or it's second life. Or gta. Or any number of games out there that allow for user to create content.
We will see several evolutions of the metaverse and there probably will continue to be more than one.
[deleted]
For me a metaverse would be a collection of objects overlayed on our physical world.
How about there is no Metaverse and never will be?
There is Internet that’s good enough.
There is Internet that’s good enough.
They mispelled Rec-room.
Play Rec-room in VR and tell me this isn't the future of gaming and online interactions.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ys_OgK2YB4E
Play Rec-room in VR and tell me this isn't the future of gaming and online interactions.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ys_OgK2YB4E
i am not interested in any of these companies bringing us the metaverse. let's do a public utility version of it then
Growing up for me it was Runescape.
i always thought it was WoW. lots to do, but all gatekept and previously defined/allowed
not really, WoW is a game, and no game can be a metaverse, because one of the most core and intrinsic qualities of what makes something a game is that it is a separate space from reality. Games studies people refer to this as "the magic circle" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magic_circle_(virtual_worlds)): the boundary separating reality from "game space".
For example, let's say you're playing a game of Checkers. That's separate from real life. You can't buy a captured Checkers pieces on eBay and then in your next game of Checkers, start with more pieces than your opponent. Being able to do those things would cause the game to break down, because the game would no longer be a contest of your wits in Checkers, it would be a contest of your existing wealth. You can't purchase points in a basketball game, you can't purchase mulligans in golf, etc. A lot of people in the blockchain/NFT space seem to be of the position that games don't currently let you purchase things with real money or sell them to other players for real money because they lack the technical capabilities, but that is not and has never been the problem. There's also the "trading an item in one game for an item in another game" but that's equally useless, it's the same thing but with a barter system, and the barter system would eventually just give way to money anyway. The problem is that introducing those mechanics causes the magic circle to break down.
By contrast a metaverse is a metaverse because the things happening in it are not in a separate, isolated space. Both games and metaverses are virtual in nature, but what makes something a metaverse is the lack of a magic circle, while what makes something a game is the presence of a magic circle. The metaverse is a virtual facet of reality; games' whole thing is that they are not reality.
A metaverse can contain a game, but not vice versa. Plus WoW is entirely owned and operated by one entity; a metaverse is pretty definitionally a situation in which any party can create their own space without needing the permission of another party, kinda like anyone can create a website without needing the permission of any party. Well, of course, you need an IP address and if you want people to be able to reach it, a DNS record and if you want SSL some certificates, so that's not a perfect analogy, but the web isn't really decentralized anyway (for these specific reasons).
For example, let's say you're playing a game of Checkers. That's separate from real life. You can't buy a captured Checkers pieces on eBay and then in your next game of Checkers, start with more pieces than your opponent. Being able to do those things would cause the game to break down, because the game would no longer be a contest of your wits in Checkers, it would be a contest of your existing wealth. You can't purchase points in a basketball game, you can't purchase mulligans in golf, etc. A lot of people in the blockchain/NFT space seem to be of the position that games don't currently let you purchase things with real money or sell them to other players for real money because they lack the technical capabilities, but that is not and has never been the problem. There's also the "trading an item in one game for an item in another game" but that's equally useless, it's the same thing but with a barter system, and the barter system would eventually just give way to money anyway. The problem is that introducing those mechanics causes the magic circle to break down.
By contrast a metaverse is a metaverse because the things happening in it are not in a separate, isolated space. Both games and metaverses are virtual in nature, but what makes something a metaverse is the lack of a magic circle, while what makes something a game is the presence of a magic circle. The metaverse is a virtual facet of reality; games' whole thing is that they are not reality.
A metaverse can contain a game, but not vice versa. Plus WoW is entirely owned and operated by one entity; a metaverse is pretty definitionally a situation in which any party can create their own space without needing the permission of another party, kinda like anyone can create a website without needing the permission of any party. Well, of course, you need an IP address and if you want people to be able to reach it, a DNS record and if you want SSL some certificates, so that's not a perfect analogy, but the web isn't really decentralized anyway (for these specific reasons).
what is up with those weird recipes in the third section? That's not vanilla
Cool, I have now just lost the little interest I had in the metaverse because Minecraft is really stupid
No, it's VRChat
No, it isn't.
Dropbox is already here - it's rsync.
Sorry but these "metaverse" articles are all cringe, boomers trying to regain influence they lost in the real world
There will never be a metaverse! The amount of electricity and device manufacturing required for it to exist at scale will likely exhaust our capabilities as a planet and lead to yet more conflict and strife.
My take is almost the complete opposite. In the Metaverse, you can spin up a office building for an unlimited number of users who can access from across the globe. Please compaire that use case, and so many more like it, to the real world alternatives in terms of resource consumption. It's an economy of infinite bits, not limited atoms.
Bits are not unlimited; entities in a virtual world consume real resources, which are finite and have cost.
While it is true that concrete and steel cost resources as well, in a resource constrained world, we will use what we already have in place as these things are quite durable.
I don't envision a future of mega skyscrapers and bullet trains, nor do I envision a world of Oculus clad employees driving a virtual forklift.
Rather I view the world continuing to exist as we currently have it: forklift driver is prompted by his UI to go to the next location to physically grab an item.
I don't envision a future of mega skyscrapers and bullet trains, nor do I envision a world of Oculus clad employees driving a virtual forklift.
Rather I view the world continuing to exist as we currently have it: forklift driver is prompted by his UI to go to the next location to physically grab an item.
And that strife will be in the real world. The thing about “real” is that it always wins over “virtual”.
100%. The virtual world is actually a very fragile thing.
Just turn off the electricity and it's gone. Imagine what a solar flare could do.
Electricity, lack of physical hardware (which in turn depends on electricity, raw materials, labor, transport), lack of security...
the dependencies are all entangled and circularly dependent, like Facebook's data center ;)
the dependencies are all entangled and circularly dependent, like Facebook's data center ;)
I really wonder how many adults > 25yrs and < 60yrs have the time to immerse themselves in any type of digital world / metaverse experience. If I was a teenager or in college, then yeah I can see it... but there are so many things to do in the 16hrs we have each day, and I already kick myself for not finishing that book, or getting an extra workout in, and just sitting in the backyard and resting my eyes. And I don't even have children...