Yes... reading the article is clearly a good first step - congrats!Actually if you read the article there are current online worlds mentioned in the article. Update if something doesn't exist that means its in a concept stage, Last I checked concept can be criticized by helping mitigate billions in losses!
I was both incredibly skeptical, and incredibly hopeful, when writing. I feel like it is possible to fight for a realized Metaverse that is good for everyone, but everyone should know there are parties already fighting to pervert it for their own gain. We'll just have to see how everything unfolds.The article is pretty lengthy, but I did enjoy the content. While it does a lot to talk up the metaverse and other sort of reality augmenting tech, the part about corporate overlords being the ones in overall control, I feel conveys the true reality that would be an online virtual reality. Well written, a great amount of context and a healthy dose of skepticism!
A TV show named Seaquest did an article about the metaverse (in 1994), traveling into the future to save humanity from themselves:I bought an Oculus Quest 2, because it was cheap and I really wanted to play HL: Alyx. It was worth it. I think VR it's a cool gadget for gaming, maybe it has its benefits for some applications. But metaverse is just insane. To make this take center stage in your life and to use it daily to replace real life activities and interactions is a pretty deranged idea.
That's exactly what I fear. Heck, it's what I'm already experiencing on my own skin! I have to work harder and longer to cover for the laziness and disinterest of my younger colleagues, as they are too busy looking down at their smartphones instead or working and being proactive.The "wasteaverse" will continue to lower output & productivity and increase the number of screen bound kids that will grow up to be .. nothing. Just another reason Fakebook should be closed down for good.
The "concept" is virtual reality, not Metaverse by Facebook.Great piece by @GGGos. It's unfortunate that many (commenters) dismissed it and didn't got to reading because they immediately associated "the Metaverse" with Facebook/Meta, but that's not at all accurate.
This is explained in the article, but then again, hard to figure that out if you didn't read the article in the first place.
It does make me wonder though how Facebook getting involved and rebranding themselves as "Meta" may have hurt the entire concept more than anything else so far.
It will belong to the "winning team(s)" - the companies you've mentioned whose infrastructure becomes the dominant version of the metaverse idea. The IP, the severs it runs on, all the data produced ("data is the new oil" being one of the main driving forces behind this) will be privately owned.I agree that a single point of ownership would be the death of the Metaverse. I touch on that in the article.
I doesn't belong to anyone yet, and hopefully we can keep it that way.