SuttaCentral

Facebook -> Meta

I got excited when thought I heard on the radio that Facebook was changing its name to “Metta”…
But no such luck… :rofl:

12 Likes

Probably a good thing! It would be so sad if Facebook was all people thought of when they heard the word metta… :stuck_out_tongue:

4 Likes

13 Likes

Seriously though, this is a bad sign. It shows that Silicon Valley is more focused on chasing sci-fi dreams than solving real-world problems.

We’ve said it before, and we’ll say it again:

Tax the rich!

We really do know better than they do how to use the money.

3 Likes

From Wikipedia:

In October 2021, following significant negative coverage of Facebook for the way its social media platform of the same name operates, media outlets reported that the parent company planned to change its name to “reflect its focus on building the metaverse”, it was rebranded as Meta later that month on October 28.

Looks like Bhante Sujato’s negative coverage of Facebook is finally taking its toll.

3 Likes

“Peta” might have been a better choice :wink:
The ‘petaverse’ has a certain ring to it :laughing:

7 Likes

"Meta is a BAD rebrand name for Facebook

It just reminds me of the word metadata or data revealing other data. That can come together to target individuals. Facebook does that and literally rebrands themselves to what they really make money off of.

The only thing that completes meta is YOUR data lol"

2 Likes

I am so not keen on “the metaverse”. You know those VR headsets? They need to be calibrated very carefully for how far apart one’s eyes are in one’s specific skull. If this is calibrated wrongly, then one’s brain gets very disoriented because it’s highly accustomed to one’s eyes never changing their spaced-apart width randomly. This can cause nausea and vomiting, like one actually had brain damage. This creates a ripe target for hackers: to hack the headsets remotely, miscalibrating this setting on purpose, to cause brain-scrambling symptoms such as nausea and vomiting in their victims.

This hack will be a highly, highly attractive cyberwar weapon, especially in the use in cold war, and terrorism. Mark my words.

No VR headset for me, thanks. I don’t expect I’ll be getting any hearts clicked under this post, owing to the “bad news” nature of it.

5 Likes
6 Likes

A friend who is quite luddite describes the internet as “a haunted slum.” Your comment resonates with this (forgive me, I can’t resist) petaphor.

7 Likes

“Petaphor”! Hilarious, @Jake

Cross-post (very relevant here):

It’s probably my age, but I have zero interest in “augmented reality” games or VR headsets. I tried an Occulus headset and it made me ill after about ten minutes. I’ve talked to a few young’uns, friends’ kids, and they said the same thing, they used to play some augmented Pokemon game but the trend died out and they moved on to something else, same thing with Occulus, it just isn’t something you want to do for hours.

I think at some point even the most hardcore screen addicts butt up against a natural limit, some point at which they say “ok, that’s too much…” and want to return to something closer to reality. This whole metaverse thing seems like companies trying to create a market that isn’t there, desperately grasping for profits and growth so they can buy a ninth yacht.

I’m ready to return to this post in ten years when the world is walking around with VR goggles strapped to their heads 24/7 and laugh at how wrong I was.

1 Like

I think VR is like 3-D, destined to be a fad repeatedly, every time they make an improvement and delude themselves into thinking “this time, we cracked it”.

I was thinking the exact same thing.

There seems to be a limit in technology, we go a certain distance, then the next thing … isn’t necessarily a thing?

The big problem with AR/VR is that it’s so inconvenient to put on some face-thing. It’d only really work if you have an implant. That’s invasive and doesn’t exist, but I’m sure it’s where Meta is heading. They’ll absolutely want to stick hardware into your brain.

The purpose is not for VR or whatever: it’s so they can monitor your brain activity in real time and use it for harvesting data and targeting ads. Ahh, so you had a twinge of hunger? How about a pizza? Thinking about that cute brunette waitress you saw? Here’s some cute brunettes on Onlyfans! Worrying about government inaction on climate change and thinking about chaining yourself to the Minister’s office? Here’s a knock on your door, you’ve been swatted!

Their problem is that they’ll have to build up a huge use case for it beforehand so it has the momentum and the software problems are solved. Our problem is that we’d have to trust Facebook to be wired directly into our brains.

I don’t think those smart glasses like Google glasses from back in the early 2010s have gone away for good. Being somewhat faceblind, something that told me who I’m talking to would be awesome! :wink:

I had a look at some AR bits and pieces about 15 years ago as part of a system for mechanics working on aircraft maintenance. It was pretty usable then and made a difference. It superimposed engineering schematics over the real parts. Instructions for diagnostic, tear down and rebuild were given, especially for novices or for old hands on new components. It’s probably a whole lot better by now, but I’m not going down that rabbit hole.

1 Like

Oh definitely, there are many uses for specific applications. I think Google pretty much pivoted Glasses to that kind of thing after they got a less-than-stellar reception.

It’s a lot easier to build for a specific set of technical requirements than to make a general-purpose device. And there are fundamental issues with privacy. Google might be less unethical than FB, or at least, more concerned with not seeming evil, but FB may well forge ahead where they hesitated.

This article may be relevant here (please note that it contains a profanity).

A Twitter user insulted a German politician. Police then raided his house.

1 Like

Here’s a decent article about the current billionaire obsession with escapism from the Guardian

I was really not expecting my future to end up as a chapter of the dystopian sci fi novels I read in highschool, but it looks like thats where we are heading.

4 Likes

I suppose there’s some logic in this metaverse thing though.

I know next to nothing about economics, but the primary problem with capitalism seems to be “you can’t have infinite growth on a finite planet”, or so the kids are telling me.

So with all the changes that capitalism needs to make for the climate crisis, I guess we are looking towards a sustainable planet made out of actual real stuff that is recycled and keeps (ahem … ‘remakes’) the planet safe and healthy for us all.

So if we (a society with ‘infinite growth’ at the heart of world economics) wish to carry on with this growth model, then we need infinite virtual planets to play on or otherwise move off-world?

Any economist want to weigh in? @Gabriel_L

1 Like

Yes you have a fair point.
Either capitalism collapses in a massive default crisis or it will have to create new frontiers for surplus value expropriation to feed its accumulation engine.
These new frontiers can be real or imaginary. For example, financial markets or metaverses.
As long as there is human labor to play the dual role of production and consumption, it carries on.

3 Likes