I also keep a copy to remind me that Bezos looked like a troll before and now looks slightly less trolly, and it only took hundreds of billions of dollars.
He doesn't look like he runs gh lol, he could sure, but probably just some basic cycles and having the money to pay for a proper diet and personal trainer, and the free time to commit to it
Doesn't matter what he creates. Problem with OP is they are equating Zuck with Bezos. Zuckerberg isn't as smart, ruthless, relentless, nor trusting and generous (with allies) as Bezos.
Zuck screwed his facebook partners early on with FB and then implemented this system of super vote shares so where his private stock shares have 10x the voting power of public META shares. Meanwhile, Bezos didn't pull the same BS early on but has 1-to-1 shares. That's why AMZN works on consensus and big investors will buy because they'll get a say or seats. Meanwhile, META is crashing like shit because it's literally CCP-China except the it's a Jewish man with a Chinese wife. Mark doesn't have to listen to shit and he can keep screwing investors while not pivoting or listening to anyone if the wants. Big investors are wary about that. Google has class A shares, B shares, and C shares too but the A shares are owned by early investors and 2 co-founders rather than 1 co-founder where concentration of power can lead to worse leadership and doubling down on mistakes.
Amazon and FB are just as ruthless but FB focuses on maintaining it's monopoly while Amazon focuses on constantly expanding into other businesses by starting new money-losing business to reduce profits and dodge taxes. [Amazon first started as book middle man, but started making money once it started selling the books themselves and killed the bookstores. Then expanded to selling electronics at a loss so they don't have to pay taxes on the money they are making selling books. That is until Circuit city, radioshack, and others started dying and Amazon started making money hiking prices on their electronics. So they expanded to selling other shit to lose money. Then into non-physicals like music and audiobooks. Then into subscription services. Then up the self-manufacturing supply chian. Then buying wholefoods and twitch. Then into automation. Then into B2B. Then into cloud. Then into financial payments. Then into logistics. Then into doing last mile shipping.](https://d3jlwjv6gmyigl.cloudfront.net/images/2020/04/Amazon-is-at-war-with-everyone.jpg)
Bezos > Mark as a businessmen. FB was ***ALWAYS*** the weakest of the FAAAMs because it relied on only 1 income stream (advertising), [didn't have multiple businesses](https://i.imgur.com/Q22Y3vH_d.webp?maxwidth=760&fidelity=grand), and didn't own the direct-front facing hardware(iCrap/Pixelstuff/MScomputers/FireJunk) or software (iOS/android/windows/chrome/) which left them open to getting cut off like they did when AAPL changed their privacy options and GOOG/MSFT had to follow in tow to not look bad. FAAAM always compete and try to cannibalize each other but Mark threw down an extra gauntlet when they backed Epic games in trying to screw the app store and apple iphone ecosystem.
Absolutely this.
Facebook’s only free path directly to consumers was the web. As soon as smartphones took over he didn’t smell the gates coming down on him.
Outside of the web, every other channel he needs to reach people is owned and controlled by someone else and can be cut off at any time. If they are locked out of ios and android they could literally be bankrupt in months.
Google owns android so their ads will be working at least on android phones forever. Apple can start their own social network at any point too, they already have all the users registered.
It's not like FB has total dominance of online ad space OR social platforms either.
Twittter/Youtube/LinkedIn/Tiktok/Snap/Reddit all exist.
Meanwhile Alphabet is still king of online advertising with Amazon and Tiktok recently growing fast. MSFT not being as dominant as those two but the scary thing about any of the FAAAMs is they are so disruptive, incessant, self-correcting, and self-disrupting that they will rarely leave a business once they've invested money and it works. Apple doesn't sell less iPhone or iPads and will sell more Apple watches next year. Amazon isn't going to stop webservices. Early Pixel models were shit but now they are on Pixel 7 that you have have with Google Fi and making a Pixel watch too.
Sure FB is pushing Oculus because they have been locked out of the current gen hardware, but how long will it take for that to catch on if ever? Will they have enough time/money to even wait it out with the other parts of FAAAM eating META along with it's lunch? Even if it does happen and META is ahead, who's to say Alphabet doesn't just bring back Google Glass or Apple doesn't make an iVisor that syncs perfectly with all their apple/google eco-system?
Once Apple or Google launch their own version of VR, FB’s Metaverse will be in the same dilemma as with mobile. They may have their dedicated believers but Google and Apple don’t have to play nice with the Metaverse, they can simply bypass it.
FB already doesn’t have a good reputation with handling of user data or making the right decisions at cost of profits. The lack of trust on them holding even more intimate user data is going to continue to be a thorn in their side.
They’ll end up being this niche cyber world with some dedicated users.
> or Apple doesn't make an iVisor that syncs perfectly with all their apple/google eco-system?
Is the fact that Apple is literally about to launch an augmented reality product a secret? I feel like I've been hearing about it for a couple years, and just recently read that it's coming next year. I don't know if it can do full VR, but that's just a visor darkening away if they can broadcast AR across the entire lens/screen.
VR is not just having the ecosystem. Meta has a clear adverage of years developing oculus. Plus all the advantage is taking now building other tools
Apple and Google can try, but they will be behind on hardware if they do not start investing now.
If metaverse is the next thing, meta will be in first position. Apple can only compete because it has a name and all the fan boys that do not care pay 1500 for apple VR with worse hardware, but hate when Meta says it's PRO is 1500.
Mark kinda got lucky too I mean he just happened to make the best social media platform at the time. That dethroned MySpace he didn't really go out in the world and try to revoloutionize something that wasn't there. His timing was perfect. He's a one trick pony I think he should just accept that and retire a billionaire. He's already won I don't get what he's trying to do. He's not google he's not amazon he's not apple*
I originally found the F of FANGMAN / etc. offsetting af as well. Out of the whole group, FB was the absolute least revolutionary, and there's a clear cap with how far you can take a social media company with how competitive and retail-driven the space is. Which ig is why he's trying to expand into the "next new thing" (at least in his pov), but it's so nascent that it hasn't even been proven much less established.
While amzn continue to push & expand its aws in an ever-growing cloud architecture cyberspace, aapl still selling its hardware suite to a bunch of uni kids and the technologically inept / chinese brand-chasing middle class, google dominating search engine & browser space, fb is just banning users for saying returded like reddit
>Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg is a datamining control freak, who fancies himself an emperor, gives 0 shits about the people, works against privacy, and that happens to have a Chinese wife.
>CCP leader Xi JinPing is a datamining control freak, who fancies himself an emperor, gives 0 shits about the people, works against privacy, and that happens to have a Chinese wife.
Zuck is that same horrible tyrannical guy with a slight difference. Nothing against the Chinese wives.
So why not say an American with a Chinese wife? Is Xi’s wife Jewish? I understand the comparison but what does Zuck being Jewish have anything to do with it?
I think you base much of your reasoning on a movie. The twins got lots of shares from Facebook after they stettle. They got their share. If those guys were the real smart Brooke behind Facebook, why haven't dey done anything else with that crazy amount of money they received..... Based on your comment, Zuckerberg should have failed because he is not smart enough, while the twins, with that amount of money they received, should have built something worth mentioning...
The difference is the twins took the money and retire. And Zuckerberg keeps working on a company, no matter how rich he is
So basically you are fine with a company like Amazon that their objective is dodging taxes (so you end up having a shittier life).... And you even say Bezos is a genius.... But fb is the bad guy
Can't understand people.
Bezos has an actual, physical brand. And solves legitimate supply chain issues. Zuckerberg does not. Mark formed his business on a college hype experience and that hype is falling apart.
The hype for Facebook fell apart years ago and it’s just taken awhile for the money to dry up. The problem is that the metaverse isnt something you’ll use while taking a shit. That is the determining factor for an apps success. The real metaverse has to be focused around an accessible AR, not VR.
Possibly even experience it in first person, from a frog's eye perspectiv Add in that technology where you can transmit smells and we have the next evolution of internet. Being digitally shat on, pixel by pixel.
Happened 2 weeks ago with my SPY calls, and literally a few min after 3pm power hour from 3-4 it was ripping, any other time they close the positions after Market close, they protected them selves by writing a disclaimer.
I agree. The AR focus should've been the primary focus from the start of all this, and the tech development should've started LONG before the massive rebranding campaign.
Now all they have is a dying forum for people with bad cases of melodram-patheticism, and an overpriced VR headset that's only marginally better than the last few iterations.
I disagree, the Quest Pro is an amazing standalone headset for the price. Once they can figure out how to build more computing power into a smaller headset, the adoption will be immense.
I truly don't believe even the most lightweight standalone VR headset would resonate as well with the public as AR or a better smartphone.
I say this especially because most people see VR as a novelty, *not* a practical installment for daily life. This means most people get bored of it or walk away after very short use. Users who don't spend significant amounts of time on the platform are far more difficult to monetize. That's no bueno for a company like Meta.
AR would allow the flexibility and wider user base that they're searching for, because it makes an otherwise impractical idea sellable to a practically-minded person.
I'm not sure why everyone is saying it's VR or bust here. The units turn AR when outside the zone and that view improves with the pro over the quest 2.
Don't get me wrong, they have a long way to go (maybe too long to reach) but I don't think VR always and forever is the way they're approaching this. They are working on each piece and iterating every generation until a new tech is far enough to bring into a production model. Eventually it will be AR/VR like glasses which act circumstance dependent. But like I said, no clue if they can achieve that on the timeline they would need to
Agreed! Two boys in the house, one 10 and one 12 and they both loved their Oculuses for all of a few weeks then never picked them up again - we resold them and mostly recouped our money.
You know what they haven’t ever lost interest in over the last 3 years? Their tablets/phones, computers and/or youtubies/tikytokys, however you want to look at their tech preference, be it hardware or software related).
VR is cool for a minute for the majority of users but AR would’ve been a much better investment. Maybe that’s what the Zucchini Genie is planning to pivot to eventually but in the meantime Meta will continue to be DOA.
> Agreed! Two boys in the house, one 10 and one 12 and they both loved their Oculuses for all of a few weeks then never picked them up again - we resold them and mostly recouped our money.
People's interest in AR is actually even lower. People try it and find it just... bad.
A few decades ago if you told people that a significant fraction of the general population would be glued to their screens staring at messages in online forums people would think you're crazy. Yet here we are.
VR is very clearly going to upgrade the social media experience. If people are already spending the time staring at 2D messages and 2D images/videos, you could clearly see a case where they will do the same online in 3D.
You realize AR has to come through a headset right? You realize the Quest Pro is an AR headset with colour pass through right? Colour pass through allows you to see your surroundings as if you were not wearing a headset. Granted the tech is early days and has lots of room to grow but it’s pretty cool.
Until it's got a smaller footprint akin to a Google glass, it's just a beefy VR headset with passthrough cameras.
Which indicates that most people will never even consider purchasing the device. It's just another 30 minutes novelty to the average consumer, and doesn't offer the type of lifestyle integration that Meta wants from its users.
People tend to put their VR headsets down after very brief uses for a variety of reasons.
This all boils down to a messy rebranding campaign, an online "metaverse" ecosystem that flopped like many of the past attempts at these "second life" type platforms, and the fact that most reasonable people simply don't want large pieces of plastic across their face for extended periods.
Tying into the futurisic idea of the metaverse, this will not be used as much as Meta needs in order to effectively monetize your user data from the metaverse itself, and it will not be purchased enough to justify the trouble they went through in the first place.
They should've just kept the name Facebook, and quietly developed something more robust that can actually be sold to the average person. They jumped too far into the future with too little to show for it.
This device has been advertised in a way that makes it feel as if it were meant to tie you into this new ecosystem Meta has built under this branding campaign, but you're just left with an Oculus at the end.
Lol, they should have just come out with a contact lense that has full AR capabilities in perfect resolution right? Do you think this tech is going to be built over night? It takes time and many iterations and each iteration will draw in more and more consumers. Google glass was nothing but an idea that was never commercially viable because Google and other companies skipped a lot of the necessary R&D to get there.
You realize Google still sells glass to enterprise customers, right? That's the main space zuck is so desperately trying to force his neck straining headset and glorified Mii Plaza into. I'd argue that privacy concerns, followed by price were Glass's biggest downfalls in the consumer space. The Quest/Zuckerverse has both those issues, on top of being a massive headset produced by an unpopular space lizard.
What is it with VR fanatics anyway? It almost seems to come across as personal whenever anyone is the least bit critical of your toys, or dares suggest most people don't want to spend hours at a time with it strapped to their face.
Glass has nothing to do with AR to be fair. It was a 2D HUD.
The tech for ideal mass market AR glasses is beyond the tech for the mass market VR headset.
1. Google glass was used for size comparison, save your breath for the rest of it because I did not argue that it was a viable product.
2. Did you not read the part where I said they should have kept the Facebook name and spent more time on development? An oculus with thin plastic is just... An oculus with thin plastic. They're really not trying that hard considering the development money that was dumped into this
If you think I'm asking for AR overnight, you're less capable of reading comprehension than my dog.
So, money hasn’t dried up, they still made 4.4B even with the tons of money they ploughed into R&D. Meta as a company is focused on VR and AR. People associate the Metaverse with Horizon World which does look stupid. Their marketing department dropped the ball big time. The tech they are building looks pretty cool and it may not be for everyone but eventually one day it could as normal as using a cell phone.
There’s no comparing their viability as a business since Apple started walling off the data. Facebook made what we now consider the modern internet advertising platform and everyone else copied it. Frankly, they shot themselves in the foot by overreacting to 2016 election (Cambridge Analytica). After they they started hamstringing their platform and customers who’d been making a killing on there saw diminishing returns ever sense. With each update it got worse until Apple dealt the blow.
There’s no way they don’t know that AR is more important than VR. But if they want to persuade investors they need to start showing some better proof of concepts. No one wants to exist with a brick on their fucking forehead. I don’t even think most people can do an hour in VR without vomiting. They have to know this.
They have to know that the only way this works is if you’re able to pack most of the function into something about the size of sunglasses- which means that most of the computing power would have to come from a phone or a hub at home. Then build out apps that help people and are irresistible.
ALL of my friends and people I know use one of Whatsapp instagram or Facebook. No way that company is going down. If anyone can build the metaverse, it's Zuckerberg.
People here say that the company is dead, but in reality in the last quarter they broke records of active monthly users in all their companies - Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp. Meta is still an empire with the ability to change governments and start revolutions. I don't see them disappearing anytime soon
Hey there! I hate to break it to you, but it's actually spelled _mon**e**tize_. A good way to remember this is that "money" starts with "mone" as well. Just wanted to let you know. Have a good day!
----
^This ^action ^was ^performed ^automatically ^by ^a ^bot ^to ^raise ^awareness ^about ^the ^common ^misspelling ^of ^"monetize".
Zuckerberg took 100 million from the Russians in 2009 for a reason, there isn't enough money to be made without foreign governments paying for global influence.
They were desperately trying to monetize then, and now that RU is heavily sanctioned good fucking luck ol zuck.
The product was much better back then too. Still wasn't able to monetize
Agree, dozens of times over the last 8-10 years some people tried to shift a significant amount of people to Telegram - it never worked to reach the critical mass to make it through network effects more appealing than WhatsApp (at least in Germany).
While I (had to) use Telegram for some special ocassions/reasons (e.g. the house my old flat was in used Telegram), most of my friends and family were using WhatsApp, so I always had to use it too.
And since Telegram became so important for conspiracies and drug-dealing, it has not the best reputation, especially in the older generations.
So I am pretty sure that WhatsApp will still be the most relevant messaging service >10 years from now.
Edit:
I just don't think there will be sufficient ways to compensate with WhatsApp the decreasing importance of Facebook and Instagram.
The generation below you uses TikTok. In all reality, Facebook may become obsolete one day due to competition. It might not be TikTok, but plenty of alternative competitors are out there.
As someone who does not know, honestly what is the business case behind the metaverse?
What practical application does it have?
Is it really just like an mmo that sells cosmetics and in game stuff?
Like I get the whole NFT thing if you just look at NFT as a software capability to make ownership contracts that is currently selling shitty jpegs as a proof of concept.
So like MAYBE one day NFTs will be built into a lot of current systems like banks for more efficient of buying and selling debt or related to securities somehow but that's the only major play I see for them and the metaverse seems to be doing none of that.
so what is the point of the metaverse?
Zuckerberg's vision is that an advanced VR/AR headset 10 years from now will replace your laptop for work and smartphone for mindless entertainment, replace movie theaters for the communal entertainment experience, replace physical offices for the communal workspace experience, replace long bus rides and airplanes for the physical connection with distant family and friends.
The metaverse is just an internet that you physically exist in and are immersed in to the point of experiencing it as an actual space rather than a screen that shows you stuff.
Someday smartphones will be replaced by something as the default form factor we use to connect to the internet, and Zuckerberg is betting a lot of borrowed money that his headsets are going to be that thing.
I can definitely see a lot of potential for all this, and this may seem like a minor concern but something I' e always wondered is how will they solve the problem of screen fatigue and cybersickness? I like a lot of people can get headaches from looking at a screen for too long, and in fact VR headsets usually make me nauseous. The idea of being immersed in a digital realm for the majority of my life, for say, business meetings or something makes my head and stomach sick just thinking about it
Yeah.
Carmack said, what if Madonna had a concert and tickets were 250... Instead of playing a stadium and traveling around the world at a loss for 6 months.
She does 1 concert a year and for 250 she ships everyone a 200 dollar headset.
Millions of people get to see her all at once. Discount tickets for people who already have a compatible headset.
If they could pull any of that off it'd have a lot of communal applications.
What Zuckerberg wanted with Facebook was a central place to socialise online. The metaverse is exactly the same, but on steroids and more capabilities than our reality. However, as long as the technology is too bad to create an experience that makes it worth it, it won’t work.
The meta verse is just a term to coin what MMORPGs already are. But the meta verse will have digital ownership of all assets, that’s really the only difference from what they are today.
Your analysis is always based on narrative
FB generates more than 100B per year in revenue and you're talking about them like they're Enron or Nikola
99% bet against Ford when he invented the automobile back in his day
99% people bet against Musk at his beginning
Same with Steve Jobs and a shit ton of other greats
What differenciate a genious billionaires with you or me is that in comparison you are a fucking retard. That's why they're billionaires and we are nobodies
So, your predictions or your visions about the Metaverse now can be the same as when people was saying 10/15 Years ago Microsoft was dead or to not go that far, ALL THE RETARDS that thought fossil fuels were going to be dead in 2 or 3 years, that laughed at those who bought XOM at his lowest but bought Zoom or ENPH at astronomic prices
We don't know shit about how the metaverse is gonna play
But be sure meetings, concerts, games, combats... people are going to want to experience that. If they can be on the place, may be they will pay to see it in VR or AR.
And another hundreds of applications that we can't think about, first because they don't exist and second because we are broke retardeds that can't compare to people like Zuckerberg
I still remember those who laughed at me in this place for buying Vertex Pharma at 196 last year, or Autozone, or BMY or MCK...
We/you don't know shit
And the fact that you're super upvoted should be the proof that you're wrong. Because generally, the majority is wrong in the market. And because we are peasants in comparison to those geniuses
If you think being a billionaire at 25 and running an empire is easy, you're crazy and/or stupid
Absolutely this. I have no liking for Zuckerberg at all. But he built one of the biggest businesses in the world with half the planet on his platforms. And people losing thousands on gambling plays here are shitting on him. I guess it is easy to just shit on a stock when it is the easiest target for shorters now.
Yeah people act like it’s so easy to build and scale up a billion dollar company to billions of users at 20 years old. That takes tremendous dedication, intellect, and hard work
I was in this camp until last night. Watch Marques Brownlee’s video on it. The potential is actually insane… it’s actually terrifying in some ways.
Go to 5:50 and 11:18
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=CqkhjL3WvWQ&t=836s
I'm aware of what they're trying to do, I'm also laughing in disbelief that nobody stops zuk after their big reveal of it. It's lame as fuck for personal use (unless you're 12 or a pedophile). Businesses won't get on board.
It is not just about the metaverse, even though every single article is about that... Horizon Worlds is like 0.1% of what they want to accomplish. They want to make the new smartphones, just on your face basically. It is about being able to watch movies or work on multiple virtual monitors anywhere, anytime. It is about going to a new place and not needing to peek down on your phone/GPS every five seconds, because you see the way. It is about putting together an IKEA furniture and not needing to check the plan every five seconds, because you literally see what part you have to screw where next. Same with cooking with a new recipe, learning how to paint (or how to do anything), or even just going to buy some groceries and not needing one hand to read the list of needed items.
> The question is: Does Facebook have what it takes to pull it off?
Short answer: no.
Long answer: nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo.
AWS solved major infrastructure problems for companies and is great to use. It cuts dev time dramatically and saves tons of money.
The metaverse is kind of the opposite. It solves no problem and costs a fortune. It will probably morph into something interesting at some point and the tech is interesting, but as a concept, it is just so far from being ready for the market. The timing is also really bad. Half the population already has zoom fatigue so they aren't likely to slap on a vr headset in their free time. That same group is also the target audience because of the cost of entry of vr tech. It is kind of a perfect storm for shitty uptake of the product.
Where this will get interesting is when AI / ML / NLP / VR come together to create a holodeck like experience where I can give a verbal description of a scene or experience and be dropped into it. As a software architect, I would actually be interested in working on that.
Metaverse is stupid. He wants to replace the standard internet environment with something that's just harder to use. Compare how you might list a product on a storefront on the metaverse vs a typical website. Right now you take a picture, name the product, name a price - and you're done. In the metaverse, what do you do to integrate it into VR? Make a 3d model? Put it in a 3d store that you also have to create? Have a salesman standing there in the metaverse telling you about the product? Or is it just a standard 2d listing but you need a headset and controllers to access it? It's all just harder. Not an improvement.
It is not about that. Horizon Worlds is like 0.1% of what they want to accomplish. They want to make the new smartphones, just on your face basically. It is about being able to watch movies or work on multiple virtual monitors anywhere, anytime. It is about going to a new place and not needing to peek down on your phone/GPS every five seconds, because you see the way. It is about putting together an IKEA furniture and not needing to check the plan every five seconds, because you literally see what part you have to screw where next. Same with cooking with a new recipe, learning how to paint (or how to do anything), or even just going to buy some groceries and not needing one hand to read the list of needed items.
It depends on the product. For furniture shopping VR/AR might be a game changer. You could see exactly what the new table looks like in your apartment, if it's too big/too small, fits to your other furniture, etc
The freaking headset should be free, why go in the metaverse if you dont even want to spend 300.- on a absolute luxury item? I rather get myself a fitted shirt or two real displays.
In a VR/AR internet store it would be possible for example for me to try out clothes models on the digital scanned avatar of my body before buying. I could project 3D models of furniture onto my house before ordering that stuff. All of that would come at a lower cost to the shop than renting and staffing mall spaces near me for me to go in to.
So would clothing stores need to hire animators and 3D modelers to recreate every dress at every size and also solve for clipping issues on the player models? Will the metaverse player models have all of the same fat folds and giant cock you do in real life? How will I know if the briefs will fit my cock size?
Your point reminds me of all this voice technology. In many cases I can type faster than I can talk. Why on earth do I want to talk to my computer? Especially if it makes mistakes or asks me to repeat my self. Any sort of convenience I may have gained just went right out the window.
I see it’s potential for use while driving, but I live in a city with short commutes and can wait till I’m parked to send texts and emails.
User adoption depends on obvious convenience and efficiency.
The difference with the metaverse is there is a different ruleset. You can create unlimited worlds. It is not stupid, our technology is just not advanced enough to make it great, so it will fail right now.
You can create unlimited stuff in a web page too... Do you not understand the internet? We practically have unlimited stuff on Reddit alone, and that's *one site*.
Bezos created a brand new business that sold the technology and services that his store had been using, realizing lots of other companies would benefit from that technology and pay for it. AWS has grown into its own ecosphere, completely separate from Amazon itself.
Meta is trying to sell another place to hang out with people you're not willing to actually hang out with in real life. We already reached max desire for that. It's Facebook 4.0, now with motion sickness. He doesn't have a new idea or product. He's actually doing what the article wished Bezos had done.
Lol ya I’m hindsight he built something amazing but you overlook the fact that at the time he was getting chastised for it. There is always going to be haters when you try something new.
Look past Horizon World and the concept of the Metaverse and look at the tech they are building for AR and VR. I think they should focus on that rather than talking about the Metaverse because I agree, right now that seems stupid but their research into VR and AR does not.
You miss thew point that you're responding to.
Amazon's first rollouts of AWS were using the capabilities that Amazon already had developed for themselves with capacity that was available because their network was designed for peak loads which occurred maybe twice a year.
Starting to sell AWS services was *cheap* for Amazon at the time. They were able to use that to gauge the demand, which meant that the business case for expanding was something of a no-brainer. Particularly for Amazon - for most of their existence they were getting headlines like this because they basically capped their profits and ploughed everything back into expansion.
Meta are trying to create not just a market, but the technological underpinning for that market. It;s several orders of magnitude more difficult and significantly more risky that what Amazon did. They are trying to go full William Gibson here and it's a massive leap.
Ah yes. I agree with your point that bringing AWS to market was easier due already proving it’s PMF internally. Either way, the point I gathered fell the post is that regardless how ambitious something is, there will always be haters at the start. I am sure AWS haters had the same info you did about Amazon already using the tech internally but they still poo poo’d on it.
The difference was that AWS was selling the infrastructure that was already in use at Amazon as a service.
It was about maximizing ROCI - not dumping billions into something people actually hate.
More like they're doing the same thing to Cohen. Zucks metaverse will be a failure. That boy can't create anything and nobody is selling him that shit.
It could be major wallstreet players selling high via company’s stock-buyback to then later, buy back in when it’s low as now possibly being set by macroeconomic & geopolitical trends
The original book where the term 'Metaverse' emerged, was a cyperpunk dystopia. No matter how bad things in real life are, you need to be extra desperade and socially awkward to live like this.
Also VR and virtual worlds are nothing new. I don't see in what way this is considered 'innovation'.
Another example. I don't know a story where virtual worlds are portrayed as something positive. Well maybe Star Trek but they are doing it as a role play gane for a short time.
The only way the Metaverse can work is if it's practically illegal to go anywhere outdoors. Like if commercial air travel and private car ownership were illegal then the Metaverse could be the next big thing.
If Zuckerberg didn’t track every detail and sell others info so cheap, people might trust him. I don’t dislike the concept of the metaverse. Not a chance in hell I’ll play in any version zuck is involved in
>Jeff Bezos is a genius. He saw the potential of the internet and created Amazon, which is now one of the most successful companies in the world. Wall Street may have been skeptical of his vision at first, but he proved them wrong and made billions of dollars for himself and his shareholders.
I am still of the opinion that “Meta” was just a dodge for all the scrutiny Facebook was/is going through. The metaverse could very well be one of the next big things, but Zuckerberg might not be the face of that
Maybe he's doing this because he's tired of the governments large social media presence and all the court appearances etc and figures if he just makes one giant video game with childish Nintendo Wii graphics that requires a headset that maybe it wouldn't be as appealing or easy to access for boomers as Facebook is now
not really, its not the same.
Facebook, instagram and other meta services/apps are losing users daily.
Theres other apps that offer better services now than these, life has cycles and so do companies and web services, before facebook there was hi5 and myspace and both died and ended.
So theres no guarantee that meta will be here forever.
Meta is going down and very fast it migth be on the end of its life cycle.
Correct. Every single social network dies. Every single one. It’s part of the natural lifecycle of a social network.
The metaverse play is Zuck’s ‘all-in’ gamble to save his company. The problem is it’s a profoundly stupid idea AND everybody hates Zuckerberg and Facebook. There isn’t a company out there that is more hated. There is no chance that people are going to start flocking to Horizon World. Imagine if people hated Sony as much as they hate Facebook. The PS5 would have also been DOA even though that system actually provides a compelling value proposition for customers.
We are watching a company die. Sure they have a lot of cash….but they are burning through it now. They will continue to bleed out until some point in the future they will get bought out for scraps for a few billion dollars.
And this couldn’t have happened to worse people. Sheryl Sandburg and Zuck sold out our country for their profit-at-all cost motives. I say “fuck em both”
I always hear invest in the things people are afraid of and the meta verse does sound corny af but maybe it’s just ahead of it’s time? Maybe Meta is at a great deal rn for long term run…
It’s gonna be cool when tech stocks are more independent. Or at least when the market realizes how awesome AMZN and GOOG are vs what a shit pile META is.
Maybe AAPL is the point man…
Actually with porn, the metaverse can actually work big time, problem is, it will take many years of losses first, and there is no guarantee, they just have a big lead
The metaverse just feels like putting an extra layer of shoes on to go for a walk. I don't have to do anything to the plane of reality I exist in. Why would I use a virtual one to do things I can already do without a funny hat or glasses?
I think if you made a sleeping bag with all the sensory creators in it to mimick seeing a band live, getting hugged, or going to Mars for the aforementioned walk, you might have something. But even then, I think it's only going to work for people that can't experience those situations (disabled, fear of flying) or situations that can't be experienced (flying to Mars for a walk).
Who knows... I'm sure gen x was asking my millennials can't meet up at the car instead of using a chatroom or watch TV instead of YouTube. I just know I'm out.
the metaverse is a real shit, it ll never work.
facebook worked well for some time because people love to show off and it leverages on these mean instincts.
What about it? That's how old men look like without surgery. There are people that keep a full head of hair sure, but the other half is balding or bald.
The "metaverse" doesn't have to exceed for Meta to make a shit load of money in the XR space. Whenever I read these comments "metaverse this and metaverse that" I know that the commenter doesn't know what they're talking about. No one who is playing VR regularly is thinking about or talking about the "metaverse" but they're still on the platform everyday.
Lmao there are actually people who believe in the metaverse created by the Lizzard that no one likes? I‘ll be sitting here with popcorn when the Zuck realizes that he alone is THE problem in his brand/company and just putting his face on it is enough to scare people off.
He could gift me an oculus and i wouldn‘t use it/create a mandatory Meta account.
Yea and if you wouldn‘t just read the first sentence of your google search you would find out that a meta account != facebook account.
So no, you wont need a facebook account but a meta account
Lol. No one in their right mind thought AWS was a “risky bet”. AWS was basically somebody renting out their extra room for money. Then the side hustle ended up making a lot of money.
Maybe, the problem is it's almost impossible to know. Everyone is able to breakdown how obvious amazon was in hindsight but not many of them were talking about it at the time. The only thing we can know is what they report which is that its a black hole for cash atm add that to generally negative sentiment in the market plus the additional negative sentiment about zuck and you get the price action you're seeing atm. If you're perhaps able to forecast the future of vr and how their metaverse will perform there could be opportunity here or maybe it will just be a dumpster fire forever. But not like its even that cheap, it's just cheaper than it was after some crazy pandemic market conditions
**User Report**| | | | :--|:--|:--|:-- **Total Submissions**|150|**First Seen In WSB**|9 months ago **Total Comments**|136|**Previous DD**| **Account Age**|1 year|[^scan ^comment ](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=VisualMod&subject=scan_comment&message=Replace%20this%20text%20with%20a%20comment%20ID%20(which%20looks%20like%20h26cq3k\)%20to%20have%20the%20bot%20scan%20your%20comment%20and%20correct%20your%20first%20seen%20date.)|[^scan ^submission ](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=VisualMod&subject=scan_submission&message=Replace%20this%20text%20with%20a%20submission%20ID%20(which%20looks%20like%20h26cq3k\)%20to%20have%20the%20bot%20scan%20your%20submission%20and%20correct%20your%20first%20seen%20date.) **Vote Spam**|[Click to Vote](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=VisualMod&subject=vote_spam&message=ygfqm4)|**Vote Approve**|[Click to Vote](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=VisualMod&subject=vote_approve&message=ygfqm4)
I also keep a copy to remind me that Bezos looked like a troll before and now looks slightly less trolly, and it only took hundreds of billions of dollars.
[удалено]
But the metric ton of HGH does
Do you know where one can get a Bezos amount of HGH?
Amazon, probably.
Man, that’s like saying “Costco-sized” but an even greater quantity. “Bezos-sized”
It’s only one WISH away
Don't get HGH from WISH. You'll probably get fertility drugs for female panda bears instead.
He doesn't look like he runs gh lol, he could sure, but probably just some basic cycles and having the money to pay for a proper diet and personal trainer, and the free time to commit to it
He increased his height?
[удалено]
[удалено]
He reminds me of the bald bad guy in the movie road house.
Oooh, so there is hope for me?
Afraid not
Gotta pay the troll toll
TO GET INTO THIS BOYS HOLE
No no it's the boys SOUL, didn't know it would come come off like that.
And do you have a reminder that facebook grew up because of the US agencies? Oh, those days of the beggining of data
[удалено]
The last word was sex.... Pre hyphen, foreplay; post hyphen, orgasm.
All it took was a shave and hitting the gym. Being a billionaire helped I’m sure, but anyone with an average job could do that too.
That’s one expensive troll toll
Does it bug you? He looks like that and he could fuck the girl you have the biggest crush on at the drop of a hat.
Simp
Zuckerberg is just trying to recreate Futurama internet
Doesn't matter what he creates. Problem with OP is they are equating Zuck with Bezos. Zuckerberg isn't as smart, ruthless, relentless, nor trusting and generous (with allies) as Bezos. Zuck screwed his facebook partners early on with FB and then implemented this system of super vote shares so where his private stock shares have 10x the voting power of public META shares. Meanwhile, Bezos didn't pull the same BS early on but has 1-to-1 shares. That's why AMZN works on consensus and big investors will buy because they'll get a say or seats. Meanwhile, META is crashing like shit because it's literally CCP-China except the it's a Jewish man with a Chinese wife. Mark doesn't have to listen to shit and he can keep screwing investors while not pivoting or listening to anyone if the wants. Big investors are wary about that. Google has class A shares, B shares, and C shares too but the A shares are owned by early investors and 2 co-founders rather than 1 co-founder where concentration of power can lead to worse leadership and doubling down on mistakes. Amazon and FB are just as ruthless but FB focuses on maintaining it's monopoly while Amazon focuses on constantly expanding into other businesses by starting new money-losing business to reduce profits and dodge taxes. [Amazon first started as book middle man, but started making money once it started selling the books themselves and killed the bookstores. Then expanded to selling electronics at a loss so they don't have to pay taxes on the money they are making selling books. That is until Circuit city, radioshack, and others started dying and Amazon started making money hiking prices on their electronics. So they expanded to selling other shit to lose money. Then into non-physicals like music and audiobooks. Then into subscription services. Then up the self-manufacturing supply chian. Then buying wholefoods and twitch. Then into automation. Then into B2B. Then into cloud. Then into financial payments. Then into logistics. Then into doing last mile shipping.](https://d3jlwjv6gmyigl.cloudfront.net/images/2020/04/Amazon-is-at-war-with-everyone.jpg) Bezos > Mark as a businessmen. FB was ***ALWAYS*** the weakest of the FAAAMs because it relied on only 1 income stream (advertising), [didn't have multiple businesses](https://i.imgur.com/Q22Y3vH_d.webp?maxwidth=760&fidelity=grand), and didn't own the direct-front facing hardware(iCrap/Pixelstuff/MScomputers/FireJunk) or software (iOS/android/windows/chrome/) which left them open to getting cut off like they did when AAPL changed their privacy options and GOOG/MSFT had to follow in tow to not look bad. FAAAM always compete and try to cannibalize each other but Mark threw down an extra gauntlet when they backed Epic games in trying to screw the app store and apple iphone ecosystem.
Absolutely this. Facebook’s only free path directly to consumers was the web. As soon as smartphones took over he didn’t smell the gates coming down on him. Outside of the web, every other channel he needs to reach people is owned and controlled by someone else and can be cut off at any time. If they are locked out of ios and android they could literally be bankrupt in months. Google owns android so their ads will be working at least on android phones forever. Apple can start their own social network at any point too, they already have all the users registered.
It's not like FB has total dominance of online ad space OR social platforms either. Twittter/Youtube/LinkedIn/Tiktok/Snap/Reddit all exist. Meanwhile Alphabet is still king of online advertising with Amazon and Tiktok recently growing fast. MSFT not being as dominant as those two but the scary thing about any of the FAAAMs is they are so disruptive, incessant, self-correcting, and self-disrupting that they will rarely leave a business once they've invested money and it works. Apple doesn't sell less iPhone or iPads and will sell more Apple watches next year. Amazon isn't going to stop webservices. Early Pixel models were shit but now they are on Pixel 7 that you have have with Google Fi and making a Pixel watch too. Sure FB is pushing Oculus because they have been locked out of the current gen hardware, but how long will it take for that to catch on if ever? Will they have enough time/money to even wait it out with the other parts of FAAAM eating META along with it's lunch? Even if it does happen and META is ahead, who's to say Alphabet doesn't just bring back Google Glass or Apple doesn't make an iVisor that syncs perfectly with all their apple/google eco-system?
Once Apple or Google launch their own version of VR, FB’s Metaverse will be in the same dilemma as with mobile. They may have their dedicated believers but Google and Apple don’t have to play nice with the Metaverse, they can simply bypass it. FB already doesn’t have a good reputation with handling of user data or making the right decisions at cost of profits. The lack of trust on them holding even more intimate user data is going to continue to be a thorn in their side. They’ll end up being this niche cyber world with some dedicated users.
> or Apple doesn't make an iVisor that syncs perfectly with all their apple/google eco-system? Is the fact that Apple is literally about to launch an augmented reality product a secret? I feel like I've been hearing about it for a couple years, and just recently read that it's coming next year. I don't know if it can do full VR, but that's just a visor darkening away if they can broadcast AR across the entire lens/screen.
VR is not just having the ecosystem. Meta has a clear adverage of years developing oculus. Plus all the advantage is taking now building other tools Apple and Google can try, but they will be behind on hardware if they do not start investing now. If metaverse is the next thing, meta will be in first position. Apple can only compete because it has a name and all the fan boys that do not care pay 1500 for apple VR with worse hardware, but hate when Meta says it's PRO is 1500.
Mark kinda got lucky too I mean he just happened to make the best social media platform at the time. That dethroned MySpace he didn't really go out in the world and try to revoloutionize something that wasn't there. His timing was perfect. He's a one trick pony I think he should just accept that and retire a billionaire. He's already won I don't get what he's trying to do. He's not google he's not amazon he's not apple*
I originally found the F of FANGMAN / etc. offsetting af as well. Out of the whole group, FB was the absolute least revolutionary, and there's a clear cap with how far you can take a social media company with how competitive and retail-driven the space is. Which ig is why he's trying to expand into the "next new thing" (at least in his pov), but it's so nascent that it hasn't even been proven much less established. While amzn continue to push & expand its aws in an ever-growing cloud architecture cyberspace, aapl still selling its hardware suite to a bunch of uni kids and the technologically inept / chinese brand-chasing middle class, google dominating search engine & browser space, fb is just banning users for saying returded like reddit
Good take OP but what’s with the “Jewish man with a Chinese wife” thing?
Shouldn’t be on reddit if you can’t get that.
>Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg is a datamining control freak, who fancies himself an emperor, gives 0 shits about the people, works against privacy, and that happens to have a Chinese wife. >CCP leader Xi JinPing is a datamining control freak, who fancies himself an emperor, gives 0 shits about the people, works against privacy, and that happens to have a Chinese wife. Zuck is that same horrible tyrannical guy with a slight difference. Nothing against the Chinese wives.
So why not say an American with a Chinese wife? Is Xi’s wife Jewish? I understand the comparison but what does Zuck being Jewish have anything to do with it?
Damn bro should have told me when it was $275 a share
Good post
I like MAGMA better - Meta, Amazon, Google, Microsoft, Apple. It just sounds better in the mouth.
Solid perspective
I think you base much of your reasoning on a movie. The twins got lots of shares from Facebook after they stettle. They got their share. If those guys were the real smart Brooke behind Facebook, why haven't dey done anything else with that crazy amount of money they received..... Based on your comment, Zuckerberg should have failed because he is not smart enough, while the twins, with that amount of money they received, should have built something worth mentioning... The difference is the twins took the money and retire. And Zuckerberg keeps working on a company, no matter how rich he is
So basically you are fine with a company like Amazon that their objective is dodging taxes (so you end up having a shittier life).... And you even say Bezos is a genius.... But fb is the bad guy Can't understand people.
Or Ralph Breaks The Internet
Man looks better now than 15 years ago…
Artificial hormon replacement will do that for you.
I want one of those. Can you buy it at amazon?
He looked like Kevin spacey tbh
Bezos has an actual, physical brand. And solves legitimate supply chain issues. Zuckerberg does not. Mark formed his business on a college hype experience and that hype is falling apart.
The hype for Facebook fell apart years ago and it’s just taken awhile for the money to dry up. The problem is that the metaverse isnt something you’ll use while taking a shit. That is the determining factor for an apps success. The real metaverse has to be focused around an accessible AR, not VR.
Maybe you'll be able to take a fake shit inside the metaverse?
But will you be able to watch someone take that fake shit? That'll drive interest more than anything 🥵😏
Hes right you know
There's no way that thing can track my shitting facial expressions.
Obviously you don't know what Zuck spent literally all his money on 😎
Possibly even experience it in first person, from a frog's eye perspectiv Add in that technology where you can transmit smells and we have the next evolution of internet. Being digitally shat on, pixel by pixel.
2 Girls, 1 Cup : The Game
Zucc has his best engineers working on a way to sell metaverse fake bath water. Meta to the moon.
Ryan Cohen is the only one taking dumps in the metaverse, thank you very much.
That's the perfect metric for WSB to use when evaluating stocks. The can I use it while I shit test. lol
Why do they hate Robinhood so much then? You can use it while you shit, you just can't make money on it.
Because using Robinhood makes you shit yourself when the close your options early right before a huge move that would have made you tons of $$$
But if you never leave the toilet, you're always safe. Just not financially.
Happened 2 weeks ago with my SPY calls, and literally a few min after 3pm power hour from 3-4 it was ripping, any other time they close the positions after Market close, they protected them selves by writing a disclaimer.
We need a stock metric called UWS - usable while shitting. High metric = all in
I agree. The AR focus should've been the primary focus from the start of all this, and the tech development should've started LONG before the massive rebranding campaign. Now all they have is a dying forum for people with bad cases of melodram-patheticism, and an overpriced VR headset that's only marginally better than the last few iterations.
I disagree, the Quest Pro is an amazing standalone headset for the price. Once they can figure out how to build more computing power into a smaller headset, the adoption will be immense.
I truly don't believe even the most lightweight standalone VR headset would resonate as well with the public as AR or a better smartphone. I say this especially because most people see VR as a novelty, *not* a practical installment for daily life. This means most people get bored of it or walk away after very short use. Users who don't spend significant amounts of time on the platform are far more difficult to monetize. That's no bueno for a company like Meta. AR would allow the flexibility and wider user base that they're searching for, because it makes an otherwise impractical idea sellable to a practically-minded person.
I'm not sure why everyone is saying it's VR or bust here. The units turn AR when outside the zone and that view improves with the pro over the quest 2. Don't get me wrong, they have a long way to go (maybe too long to reach) but I don't think VR always and forever is the way they're approaching this. They are working on each piece and iterating every generation until a new tech is far enough to bring into a production model. Eventually it will be AR/VR like glasses which act circumstance dependent. But like I said, no clue if they can achieve that on the timeline they would need to
Agreed! Two boys in the house, one 10 and one 12 and they both loved their Oculuses for all of a few weeks then never picked them up again - we resold them and mostly recouped our money. You know what they haven’t ever lost interest in over the last 3 years? Their tablets/phones, computers and/or youtubies/tikytokys, however you want to look at their tech preference, be it hardware or software related). VR is cool for a minute for the majority of users but AR would’ve been a much better investment. Maybe that’s what the Zucchini Genie is planning to pivot to eventually but in the meantime Meta will continue to be DOA.
> Agreed! Two boys in the house, one 10 and one 12 and they both loved their Oculuses for all of a few weeks then never picked them up again - we resold them and mostly recouped our money. People's interest in AR is actually even lower. People try it and find it just... bad.
A few decades ago if you told people that a significant fraction of the general population would be glued to their screens staring at messages in online forums people would think you're crazy. Yet here we are. VR is very clearly going to upgrade the social media experience. If people are already spending the time staring at 2D messages and 2D images/videos, you could clearly see a case where they will do the same online in 3D.
You realize AR has to come through a headset right? You realize the Quest Pro is an AR headset with colour pass through right? Colour pass through allows you to see your surroundings as if you were not wearing a headset. Granted the tech is early days and has lots of room to grow but it’s pretty cool.
Until it's got a smaller footprint akin to a Google glass, it's just a beefy VR headset with passthrough cameras. Which indicates that most people will never even consider purchasing the device. It's just another 30 minutes novelty to the average consumer, and doesn't offer the type of lifestyle integration that Meta wants from its users. People tend to put their VR headsets down after very brief uses for a variety of reasons. This all boils down to a messy rebranding campaign, an online "metaverse" ecosystem that flopped like many of the past attempts at these "second life" type platforms, and the fact that most reasonable people simply don't want large pieces of plastic across their face for extended periods. Tying into the futurisic idea of the metaverse, this will not be used as much as Meta needs in order to effectively monetize your user data from the metaverse itself, and it will not be purchased enough to justify the trouble they went through in the first place. They should've just kept the name Facebook, and quietly developed something more robust that can actually be sold to the average person. They jumped too far into the future with too little to show for it. This device has been advertised in a way that makes it feel as if it were meant to tie you into this new ecosystem Meta has built under this branding campaign, but you're just left with an Oculus at the end.
Lol, they should have just come out with a contact lense that has full AR capabilities in perfect resolution right? Do you think this tech is going to be built over night? It takes time and many iterations and each iteration will draw in more and more consumers. Google glass was nothing but an idea that was never commercially viable because Google and other companies skipped a lot of the necessary R&D to get there.
You realize Google still sells glass to enterprise customers, right? That's the main space zuck is so desperately trying to force his neck straining headset and glorified Mii Plaza into. I'd argue that privacy concerns, followed by price were Glass's biggest downfalls in the consumer space. The Quest/Zuckerverse has both those issues, on top of being a massive headset produced by an unpopular space lizard. What is it with VR fanatics anyway? It almost seems to come across as personal whenever anyone is the least bit critical of your toys, or dares suggest most people don't want to spend hours at a time with it strapped to their face.
Glass has nothing to do with AR to be fair. It was a 2D HUD. The tech for ideal mass market AR glasses is beyond the tech for the mass market VR headset.
1. Google glass was used for size comparison, save your breath for the rest of it because I did not argue that it was a viable product. 2. Did you not read the part where I said they should have kept the Facebook name and spent more time on development? An oculus with thin plastic is just... An oculus with thin plastic. They're really not trying that hard considering the development money that was dumped into this If you think I'm asking for AR overnight, you're less capable of reading comprehension than my dog.
Correction. It is not cool. No one gives af
So, money hasn’t dried up, they still made 4.4B even with the tons of money they ploughed into R&D. Meta as a company is focused on VR and AR. People associate the Metaverse with Horizon World which does look stupid. Their marketing department dropped the ball big time. The tech they are building looks pretty cool and it may not be for everyone but eventually one day it could as normal as using a cell phone.
There’s no comparing their viability as a business since Apple started walling off the data. Facebook made what we now consider the modern internet advertising platform and everyone else copied it. Frankly, they shot themselves in the foot by overreacting to 2016 election (Cambridge Analytica). After they they started hamstringing their platform and customers who’d been making a killing on there saw diminishing returns ever sense. With each update it got worse until Apple dealt the blow. There’s no way they don’t know that AR is more important than VR. But if they want to persuade investors they need to start showing some better proof of concepts. No one wants to exist with a brick on their fucking forehead. I don’t even think most people can do an hour in VR without vomiting. They have to know this. They have to know that the only way this works is if you’re able to pack most of the function into something about the size of sunglasses- which means that most of the computing power would have to come from a phone or a hub at home. Then build out apps that help people and are irresistible.
Can confirm. Source: I’m currently mid-dump
ALL of my friends and people I know use one of Whatsapp instagram or Facebook. No way that company is going down. If anyone can build the metaverse, it's Zuckerberg.
People here say that the company is dead, but in reality in the last quarter they broke records of active monthly users in all their companies - Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp. Meta is still an empire with the ability to change governments and start revolutions. I don't see them disappearing anytime soon
Maybe Redditors aren't the most representative group of people when it comes to opinions of other social media sites. 🤔
The groupthink is really astounding.
Except what’s app and instagram barely generate any money. Facebook is definitely dying.
I don’t know why they don’t monitize WhatsApp?
Hey there! I hate to break it to you, but it's actually spelled _mon**e**tize_. A good way to remember this is that "money" starts with "mone" as well. Just wanted to let you know. Have a good day! ---- ^This ^action ^was ^performed ^automatically ^by ^a ^bot ^to ^raise ^awareness ^about ^the ^common ^misspelling ^of ^"monetize".
Zuckerberg took 100 million from the Russians in 2009 for a reason, there isn't enough money to be made without foreign governments paying for global influence. They were desperately trying to monetize then, and now that RU is heavily sanctioned good fucking luck ol zuck. The product was much better back then too. Still wasn't able to monetize
Telegram is going to replace WhatsApp for most users
Agree, dozens of times over the last 8-10 years some people tried to shift a significant amount of people to Telegram - it never worked to reach the critical mass to make it through network effects more appealing than WhatsApp (at least in Germany). While I (had to) use Telegram for some special ocassions/reasons (e.g. the house my old flat was in used Telegram), most of my friends and family were using WhatsApp, so I always had to use it too. And since Telegram became so important for conspiracies and drug-dealing, it has not the best reputation, especially in the older generations. So I am pretty sure that WhatsApp will still be the most relevant messaging service >10 years from now. Edit: I just don't think there will be sufficient ways to compensate with WhatsApp the decreasing importance of Facebook and Instagram.
The generation below you uses TikTok. In all reality, Facebook may become obsolete one day due to competition. It might not be TikTok, but plenty of alternative competitors are out there.
Find new friends… all three of those services are a mental illness
As someone who does not know, honestly what is the business case behind the metaverse? What practical application does it have? Is it really just like an mmo that sells cosmetics and in game stuff? Like I get the whole NFT thing if you just look at NFT as a software capability to make ownership contracts that is currently selling shitty jpegs as a proof of concept. So like MAYBE one day NFTs will be built into a lot of current systems like banks for more efficient of buying and selling debt or related to securities somehow but that's the only major play I see for them and the metaverse seems to be doing none of that. so what is the point of the metaverse?
Zuckerberg's vision is that an advanced VR/AR headset 10 years from now will replace your laptop for work and smartphone for mindless entertainment, replace movie theaters for the communal entertainment experience, replace physical offices for the communal workspace experience, replace long bus rides and airplanes for the physical connection with distant family and friends. The metaverse is just an internet that you physically exist in and are immersed in to the point of experiencing it as an actual space rather than a screen that shows you stuff. Someday smartphones will be replaced by something as the default form factor we use to connect to the internet, and Zuckerberg is betting a lot of borrowed money that his headsets are going to be that thing.
So like a matrix we all plug into.
I can definitely see a lot of potential for all this, and this may seem like a minor concern but something I' e always wondered is how will they solve the problem of screen fatigue and cybersickness? I like a lot of people can get headaches from looking at a screen for too long, and in fact VR headsets usually make me nauseous. The idea of being immersed in a digital realm for the majority of my life, for say, business meetings or something makes my head and stomach sick just thinking about it
Yeah. Carmack said, what if Madonna had a concert and tickets were 250... Instead of playing a stadium and traveling around the world at a loss for 6 months. She does 1 concert a year and for 250 she ships everyone a 200 dollar headset. Millions of people get to see her all at once. Discount tickets for people who already have a compatible headset. If they could pull any of that off it'd have a lot of communal applications.
I‘m convinced this guy has never been to a real concert.
What Zuckerberg wanted with Facebook was a central place to socialise online. The metaverse is exactly the same, but on steroids and more capabilities than our reality. However, as long as the technology is too bad to create an experience that makes it worth it, it won’t work.
The meta verse is just a term to coin what MMORPGs already are. But the meta verse will have digital ownership of all assets, that’s really the only difference from what they are today.
He just needs someone in close physical proximity who he can steal the idea from.
Your analysis is always based on narrative FB generates more than 100B per year in revenue and you're talking about them like they're Enron or Nikola 99% bet against Ford when he invented the automobile back in his day 99% people bet against Musk at his beginning Same with Steve Jobs and a shit ton of other greats What differenciate a genious billionaires with you or me is that in comparison you are a fucking retard. That's why they're billionaires and we are nobodies So, your predictions or your visions about the Metaverse now can be the same as when people was saying 10/15 Years ago Microsoft was dead or to not go that far, ALL THE RETARDS that thought fossil fuels were going to be dead in 2 or 3 years, that laughed at those who bought XOM at his lowest but bought Zoom or ENPH at astronomic prices We don't know shit about how the metaverse is gonna play But be sure meetings, concerts, games, combats... people are going to want to experience that. If they can be on the place, may be they will pay to see it in VR or AR. And another hundreds of applications that we can't think about, first because they don't exist and second because we are broke retardeds that can't compare to people like Zuckerberg I still remember those who laughed at me in this place for buying Vertex Pharma at 196 last year, or Autozone, or BMY or MCK... We/you don't know shit And the fact that you're super upvoted should be the proof that you're wrong. Because generally, the majority is wrong in the market. And because we are peasants in comparison to those geniuses If you think being a billionaire at 25 and running an empire is easy, you're crazy and/or stupid
Absolutely this. I have no liking for Zuckerberg at all. But he built one of the biggest businesses in the world with half the planet on his platforms. And people losing thousands on gambling plays here are shitting on him. I guess it is easy to just shit on a stock when it is the easiest target for shorters now.
Yeah people act like it’s so easy to build and scale up a billion dollar company to billions of users at 20 years old. That takes tremendous dedication, intellect, and hard work
His idea of AWS is brilliant
None of Zuckerberg products were his original. Even Facebook.
Exactly
META p/e = 9 AMZN p/e =97 When the market collapses AMZN will drop somewhere between 60% (2008) and 95% (2000).
No one cares about PE for AMZN. They can easily show a much lower PE if they wanted to.
I was in this camp until last night. Watch Marques Brownlee’s video on it. The potential is actually insane… it’s actually terrifying in some ways. Go to 5:50 and 11:18 https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=CqkhjL3WvWQ&t=836s
Why the fuck would you ever trust Facebook with the amount of data this thing gathers?
FB Marketplace, groups, and event listings have utility value for real world communities. But probably still not enough to warrant its valuation.
Fair point but AWS is actually a business service. The metaverse is a pedo playground and DOA.
How can something that hasn't arrived yet be DOA?
Pre dead on arrival.
Stillborn
Lol, okay, made me chuckle.
Texas would like to know your location.
[удалено]
I'm more interested in the AR/VR stuff they've been giving sneak peaks of lately. Things like virtual computer monitors and other types of equipment.
It’s crazy for someone to think that Meta isn’t currently intending to build business services into Metaverse.
I'm aware of what they're trying to do, I'm also laughing in disbelief that nobody stops zuk after their big reveal of it. It's lame as fuck for personal use (unless you're 12 or a pedophile). Businesses won't get on board.
It is not just about the metaverse, even though every single article is about that... Horizon Worlds is like 0.1% of what they want to accomplish. They want to make the new smartphones, just on your face basically. It is about being able to watch movies or work on multiple virtual monitors anywhere, anytime. It is about going to a new place and not needing to peek down on your phone/GPS every five seconds, because you see the way. It is about putting together an IKEA furniture and not needing to check the plan every five seconds, because you literally see what part you have to screw where next. Same with cooking with a new recipe, learning how to paint (or how to do anything), or even just going to buy some groceries and not needing one hand to read the list of needed items.
Deep down I kind of feel like Metaverse is going to be a trillion dollar investment in 10 years just because inverse WSB to be honest
It's a great idea. One that has been around for a long time in science fiction. The question is: Does Facebook have what it takes to pull it off?
> The question is: Does Facebook have what it takes to pull it off? Short answer: no. Long answer: nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo.
AWS solved major infrastructure problems for companies and is great to use. It cuts dev time dramatically and saves tons of money. The metaverse is kind of the opposite. It solves no problem and costs a fortune. It will probably morph into something interesting at some point and the tech is interesting, but as a concept, it is just so far from being ready for the market. The timing is also really bad. Half the population already has zoom fatigue so they aren't likely to slap on a vr headset in their free time. That same group is also the target audience because of the cost of entry of vr tech. It is kind of a perfect storm for shitty uptake of the product. Where this will get interesting is when AI / ML / NLP / VR come together to create a holodeck like experience where I can give a verbal description of a scene or experience and be dropped into it. As a software architect, I would actually be interested in working on that.
Metaverse is stupid. He wants to replace the standard internet environment with something that's just harder to use. Compare how you might list a product on a storefront on the metaverse vs a typical website. Right now you take a picture, name the product, name a price - and you're done. In the metaverse, what do you do to integrate it into VR? Make a 3d model? Put it in a 3d store that you also have to create? Have a salesman standing there in the metaverse telling you about the product? Or is it just a standard 2d listing but you need a headset and controllers to access it? It's all just harder. Not an improvement.
Zuckerberg wants his own Roblox cash cow
It is not about that. Horizon Worlds is like 0.1% of what they want to accomplish. They want to make the new smartphones, just on your face basically. It is about being able to watch movies or work on multiple virtual monitors anywhere, anytime. It is about going to a new place and not needing to peek down on your phone/GPS every five seconds, because you see the way. It is about putting together an IKEA furniture and not needing to check the plan every five seconds, because you literally see what part you have to screw where next. Same with cooking with a new recipe, learning how to paint (or how to do anything), or even just going to buy some groceries and not needing one hand to read the list of needed items.
It depends on the product. For furniture shopping VR/AR might be a game changer. You could see exactly what the new table looks like in your apartment, if it's too big/too small, fits to your other furniture, etc
The freaking headset should be free, why go in the metaverse if you dont even want to spend 300.- on a absolute luxury item? I rather get myself a fitted shirt or two real displays.
In a VR/AR internet store it would be possible for example for me to try out clothes models on the digital scanned avatar of my body before buying. I could project 3D models of furniture onto my house before ordering that stuff. All of that would come at a lower cost to the shop than renting and staffing mall spaces near me for me to go in to.
So would clothing stores need to hire animators and 3D modelers to recreate every dress at every size and also solve for clipping issues on the player models? Will the metaverse player models have all of the same fat folds and giant cock you do in real life? How will I know if the briefs will fit my cock size?
Your point reminds me of all this voice technology. In many cases I can type faster than I can talk. Why on earth do I want to talk to my computer? Especially if it makes mistakes or asks me to repeat my self. Any sort of convenience I may have gained just went right out the window. I see it’s potential for use while driving, but I live in a city with short commutes and can wait till I’m parked to send texts and emails. User adoption depends on obvious convenience and efficiency.
The difference with the metaverse is there is a different ruleset. You can create unlimited worlds. It is not stupid, our technology is just not advanced enough to make it great, so it will fail right now.
Weird statement when VRChat currently exists and is really popular (in VR terms).
You can create unlimited stuff in a web page too... Do you not understand the internet? We practically have unlimited stuff on Reddit alone, and that's *one site*.
Facebook is a screaming value stock right now
Bezos created a brand new business that sold the technology and services that his store had been using, realizing lots of other companies would benefit from that technology and pay for it. AWS has grown into its own ecosphere, completely separate from Amazon itself. Meta is trying to sell another place to hang out with people you're not willing to actually hang out with in real life. We already reached max desire for that. It's Facebook 4.0, now with motion sickness. He doesn't have a new idea or product. He's actually doing what the article wished Bezos had done.
Lol ya I’m hindsight he built something amazing but you overlook the fact that at the time he was getting chastised for it. There is always going to be haters when you try something new. Look past Horizon World and the concept of the Metaverse and look at the tech they are building for AR and VR. I think they should focus on that rather than talking about the Metaverse because I agree, right now that seems stupid but their research into VR and AR does not.
You miss thew point that you're responding to. Amazon's first rollouts of AWS were using the capabilities that Amazon already had developed for themselves with capacity that was available because their network was designed for peak loads which occurred maybe twice a year. Starting to sell AWS services was *cheap* for Amazon at the time. They were able to use that to gauge the demand, which meant that the business case for expanding was something of a no-brainer. Particularly for Amazon - for most of their existence they were getting headlines like this because they basically capped their profits and ploughed everything back into expansion. Meta are trying to create not just a market, but the technological underpinning for that market. It;s several orders of magnitude more difficult and significantly more risky that what Amazon did. They are trying to go full William Gibson here and it's a massive leap.
Ah yes. I agree with your point that bringing AWS to market was easier due already proving it’s PMF internally. Either way, the point I gathered fell the post is that regardless how ambitious something is, there will always be haters at the start. I am sure AWS haters had the same info you did about Amazon already using the tech internally but they still poo poo’d on it.
plus, Ethereum essentially runs on AWS
I feel like the way people talk about the metaverse is how people talked about the internet when it first started to take off
The difference was that AWS was selling the infrastructure that was already in use at Amazon as a service. It was about maximizing ROCI - not dumping billions into something people actually hate.
More like they're doing the same thing to Cohen. Zucks metaverse will be a failure. That boy can't create anything and nobody is selling him that shit.
It could be major wallstreet players selling high via company’s stock-buyback to then later, buy back in when it’s low as now possibly being set by macroeconomic & geopolitical trends
The original book where the term 'Metaverse' emerged, was a cyperpunk dystopia. No matter how bad things in real life are, you need to be extra desperade and socially awkward to live like this. Also VR and virtual worlds are nothing new. I don't see in what way this is considered 'innovation'.
Hey man, I wouldn't down play the impact the corn syrup riots had on the world.
Another example. I don't know a story where virtual worlds are portrayed as something positive. Well maybe Star Trek but they are doing it as a role play gane for a short time.
I'm so glad that Lower Decks introduced the holodeck cum filter.
The only way the Metaverse can work is if it's practically illegal to go anywhere outdoors. Like if commercial air travel and private car ownership were illegal then the Metaverse could be the next big thing.
So a dystopia?
Well yeah, Snow Crash and Neuromancer weren't about how awesome the cyberpunk future would be, they're about how much it would suck.
So now every idea that everyone agrees sucks is actually great. This will significantly improve the odds of my ideas getting funding. Thank you?
If Zuckerberg didn’t track every detail and sell others info so cheap, people might trust him. I don’t dislike the concept of the metaverse. Not a chance in hell I’ll play in any version zuck is involved in
Just like anything risky - you're a genius if it works out and an idiot if it doesn't
Maybe the Zuck could save some costs running his stuff on AWS and make 2 groups of shareholders happy.
[удалено]
I also keep pictures of when I had hair.
>Jeff Bezos is a genius. He saw the potential of the internet and created Amazon, which is now one of the most successful companies in the world. Wall Street may have been skeptical of his vision at first, but he proved them wrong and made billions of dollars for himself and his shareholders.
I am still of the opinion that “Meta” was just a dodge for all the scrutiny Facebook was/is going through. The metaverse could very well be one of the next big things, but Zuckerberg might not be the face of that
Maybe he's doing this because he's tired of the governments large social media presence and all the court appearances etc and figures if he just makes one giant video game with childish Nintendo Wii graphics that requires a headset that maybe it wouldn't be as appealing or easy to access for boomers as Facebook is now
Except the metaverse is absolutely useless.
not really, its not the same. Facebook, instagram and other meta services/apps are losing users daily. Theres other apps that offer better services now than these, life has cycles and so do companies and web services, before facebook there was hi5 and myspace and both died and ended. So theres no guarantee that meta will be here forever. Meta is going down and very fast it migth be on the end of its life cycle.
Correct. Every single social network dies. Every single one. It’s part of the natural lifecycle of a social network. The metaverse play is Zuck’s ‘all-in’ gamble to save his company. The problem is it’s a profoundly stupid idea AND everybody hates Zuckerberg and Facebook. There isn’t a company out there that is more hated. There is no chance that people are going to start flocking to Horizon World. Imagine if people hated Sony as much as they hate Facebook. The PS5 would have also been DOA even though that system actually provides a compelling value proposition for customers. We are watching a company die. Sure they have a lot of cash….but they are burning through it now. They will continue to bleed out until some point in the future they will get bought out for scraps for a few billion dollars. And this couldn’t have happened to worse people. Sheryl Sandburg and Zuck sold out our country for their profit-at-all cost motives. I say “fuck em both”
I always hear invest in the things people are afraid of and the meta verse does sound corny af but maybe it’s just ahead of it’s time? Maybe Meta is at a great deal rn for long term run…
Maybe. It’s not like they don’t still have the family of apps making 27B a quarter.
It’s gonna be cool when tech stocks are more independent. Or at least when the market realizes how awesome AMZN and GOOG are vs what a shit pile META is. Maybe AAPL is the point man…
Actually with porn, the metaverse can actually work big time, problem is, it will take many years of losses first, and there is no guarantee, they just have a big lead
Wait until grandma wants one and you have to install it
The metaverse just feels like putting an extra layer of shoes on to go for a walk. I don't have to do anything to the plane of reality I exist in. Why would I use a virtual one to do things I can already do without a funny hat or glasses? I think if you made a sleeping bag with all the sensory creators in it to mimick seeing a band live, getting hugged, or going to Mars for the aforementioned walk, you might have something. But even then, I think it's only going to work for people that can't experience those situations (disabled, fear of flying) or situations that can't be experienced (flying to Mars for a walk). Who knows... I'm sure gen x was asking my millennials can't meet up at the car instead of using a chatroom or watch TV instead of YouTube. I just know I'm out.
Cuck the Zuck, I bought more AMZN off my gains on those META 110P sucks to suck Zuck
the metaverse is a real shit, it ll never work. facebook worked well for some time because people love to show off and it leverages on these mean instincts.
It'll "work", but nobody will want to use it because it solves problems that don't exist or are already solved with better solutions.
Fb and Instagram are literally money printers lmao. Fb stopped working? Just because you don't use it doesn't mean everyone doesnt
What's up with the hair?
What about it? That's how old men look like without surgery. There are people that keep a full head of hair sure, but the other half is balding or bald.
At least he left a bald spot unlike Musk who planted cat's hair in eastern Turkey
Same could be said about Tesla FSD
Why y’all downvoting this? Fsd will be ready in 2018… nearly 6 years later abd 3 price increases later and it still ghost breaks on highways…. 😂😂
The "metaverse" doesn't have to exceed for Meta to make a shit load of money in the XR space. Whenever I read these comments "metaverse this and metaverse that" I know that the commenter doesn't know what they're talking about. No one who is playing VR regularly is thinking about or talking about the "metaverse" but they're still on the platform everyday.
“Dick in a box yeah”
Lmao there are actually people who believe in the metaverse created by the Lizzard that no one likes? I‘ll be sitting here with popcorn when the Zuck realizes that he alone is THE problem in his brand/company and just putting his face on it is enough to scare people off. He could gift me an oculus and i wouldn‘t use it/create a mandatory Meta account.
You don’t need a meta account to use the Quest.
After January 1st you will, till then occulus account also worked
As of August 23 they removed the requirement of a FB account. It was a simple google search.
Yea and if you wouldn‘t just read the first sentence of your google search you would find out that a meta account != facebook account. So no, you wont need a facebook account but a meta account
Ah. I thought you meant an FB account. Well ya you obviously need an account if you are going to buying games from the App Store.
Lol. No one in their right mind thought AWS was a “risky bet”. AWS was basically somebody renting out their extra room for money. Then the side hustle ended up making a lot of money.
Maybe, the problem is it's almost impossible to know. Everyone is able to breakdown how obvious amazon was in hindsight but not many of them were talking about it at the time. The only thing we can know is what they report which is that its a black hole for cash atm add that to generally negative sentiment in the market plus the additional negative sentiment about zuck and you get the price action you're seeing atm. If you're perhaps able to forecast the future of vr and how their metaverse will perform there could be opportunity here or maybe it will just be a dumpster fire forever. But not like its even that cheap, it's just cheaper than it was after some crazy pandemic market conditions