Hacker News Reader

Comment by nseggs | Hacker News Reader

“Meta Unceremoniously Kills Off Oculus Brand” - Meta: The New Meta. Facebook pretending to be self-aware is the new meta. No that’s old-meta. What’s the take? Hmm. Pick a New Name: The Easiest Meta. Introduce Meta to the popular discourse. Let the masses use it freely. Embrace the freedom of missed interpretation. It’s not Fake, it’s Meta. It’s not Facebook, it’s Meta. You wouldn’t understand, it’s too meta. How cool would it be if we just called it Meta? Metacognition. Meta-engineering. Meta-reality: it’s the business we’re already in! Have you seen the new Meta branding? It’s like the universe, but meta, and now we own it. It was so simple! The new meta, endlessly cyclical, and quite a long way from advice dog. Rush B. Trust Me.

View on HN

I’d say that it’s less about choosing “Meta” as a name, and more the realization that Facebook isn’t just the name of the company, it’s the name of a single product the company makes. I’m really unsurprised by the name change.

Think of what it would be like if Microsoft were called “Windows”, or Apple were called “Mac”. Facebook has realized that their main product does not appeal to everyone, and attaching the “Facebook” name to everything they do is not a great way forward. That’s why the Facebook name didn’t take over the Instagram or WhatsApp brands.

I think this is partially right. The difference is Apple made the Mac. Microsoft made Windows. Facebook was the thing and then Facebook (the thing) made Facebook, the company. The relationship between owner and intention is something like retroactive. If Facebook could have called Instagram “Facebook” at the very moment of acquisition and got away with it I’m sure they’d have been thrilled. But that was similarly never the way of things. Facebook the company has always been trying to convince everyone that Facebook (the originating product and all it’s ill-gotten marvels) is a product of the thinking. But it’s the source. A tiny homebrew app for gossip didn’t suddenly will into existence Instagram and WhatsApp. The nature and timing of the product put the resulting company in a financial position to encourage us all to play along and believe they had anything to do with the purpose and utility of those things. Oculus was similar. The promise of infinite cash for the problem. Make it better faster. Fastest. The product existed, now please believe Facebook is why. Call it meta. The meta is why. Sure it’s a little on the nose, but is just here to assemble the pieces anyway, so who cares what it’s called. Now the carnivorous beast built of such crudely stitched limbs it so desperately tried to integrate has donned a hat. A hat on a hat. Unsurprising, yes.

> Facebook has realized that their main product does not appeal to everyone,

Let's don't fool ourselves: the only reason to change the name of the company is because "Facebook" name has many negative (and fairly earned) connotations. Every time "Facebook" (the company) launched a new product there were concerns about the privacy and invasion they do (and to me their were justified).

They want to reduce that by being able to say "Meta just created X" instead of "Facebook just created X". Let's see how far it goes...

I would love for some judge somewhere to wholesale reject any trademark efforts on FBs part for “Meta”

The first computer made by Apple was the Apple I. Then came the Apple 2. I'd suggest leaving them out of your example ;-)

Interestingly Mozilla seems to be doing the opposite and naming more things "Firefox". But I don't think they're an example to be learned from when it comes to these decisions.

Both Apple and Microsoft had made many more things before making Mac and Windows. They had a larger vision from the start, unlike Facebook.

Metastasized metadata.

Back at Sun it was Java. I wonder whether it is a great vision that will propel FB even further up, or a start of a renaming orgy and detached from reality megaprojects in a company overtaken by mid-management types and marking transitioning of FB from an ever expanding superstar into a large undead incumbent.

I’m imagining it somewhere deep in the unceremonious middle. It’s unfortunate. Are they too big to die? I’m not super-rooting for that, but where is the reality check of the 90s? Where’s the actual disruption? The actual non-Facebook metaverse is a concept I don’t see them nearing. Huge tech != meaningful longevity. Are these companies surviving on market growth alone? Not actual market growth, but literally just access across the planet? Countries from the distant electronic past coming into digital yesterday? It’s free users for a system that is literally not innovating outside of FRL. Are they? What is the offering to humanity? On what merit dare they claim dibs on what they guess is the next plane of reality? Use Facebook messenger on Instagram? Now you don’t have to use Facebook? What a 2021 we’re having! I absolutely love the tech demos, but the ability to have a photorealistic avatar is not what is holding the metaverse back. Are we really just waiting around for a 1:1 representation of our physical identities? Think of the security you could have if we built the privacy in! Should I thank Facebook for having the money to fund the development that everybody else wants to have the money to do? Walkabout Minigolf is literally the most engaging and dynamic social experience I’ve had in VR. It’s low-poly minigolf. Did all the Facebook thinking stem from “how do we own the next App Store?” Because it really feels that way. Is that how we got the App Store?

> Did all the Facebook thinking stem from “how do we own the next App Store?” Because it really feels that way. Is that how we got the App Store?

You sound so dismissive when you put it that way but the App Store makes an absurd amount of money and Their 3 main products have to sit on top of their competitors foundations.

It makes sense for them to try to make their own and the smartphone battle is already over.

Are old facebook engenineers going to be called now meta engineers?

MAANG

MANGA

That's another layer of meta.

GAMMAN

But Google is now Alphabet, so should be MAANA

All the big consumer facing brand of Google are still under Google. YouTube is owned by Google directly, not by Alphabet. So it is fair to keep Google's G in the acronym. Also Microsoft should be in there much more than Netflix.

This gives us MAGMA. Like the thing that will burn you alive if you touch it.

If you leave Google as Alphabet, and keep the Microsoft for Netflex swap, it’s: MAMAA

And a 2-second 3D hologram of Freddie Mercury just popped into existence.

Close enough... https://youtu.be/pG-kdPZZwQE

> This gives us MAGMA

Best pronounced as Dr. Evil does in the first Austin Powers movie

If we added one starting with Z we could make it really confusing: AMAZAN. Any suggestions?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com