Hacker News Reader

Comment by deltree7 | Hacker News Reader

Lot of Googlers are anti-big-tech, anti-corporation :)

1) If you think Transformers weren't category defining, I don't know what to say.

2) Metaverse isn't a failure. That's like saying in 2019, "Chat Agents are a failure"

Metaverse is DoA. Public perception is that it is either too complicated/expensive to use or that it is essentially a worse VRChat. More technically inclined circles see it as a data harvester and crypto-scam breeding ground. Facebook itself does not use it for its supposed intended purpose of virtual conferencing, instead mandating that all employees return to the physical office to work. It has next to no adoption and is the butt of many jokes. Romero abandoned the project with a public statement saying how out of touch and inefficient the workforce behind it is.

Your outlandish sweeping claims about the users of this site aside, sticking your neck out for the Metaverse is just not the hill to die on.

The Public's lack of imagination / vision is the worst indicator of anything. There is a reason there are only a handful of Jobs, Zuck, Elon, Bezos, Gates, Buffett in the world but 15 Million people on Wallstreetbets.

They fired entire orgs that were working on metaverse at facebook. Spoke about it with a sad friend yesterday. At least the facebook metaverse has been cut down.

> The Public's lack of imagination / vision is the worst indicator of anything

So? Most great ideas end up as objective failures. Also great visionaries generally actually have some at least somewhat specific vision of what are they trying to achieve, neither Zuckerberg nor anyone else were yet able to coherently explain WTH is the Metaverse supposed to be.

IMHO whatever Meta is doing seems much more likely to end up as the Apple Newton than the iPad/iPhone... (which to be fair is not a bad thing).

And they would've been right in 2019. The hype was not matching the technology. The fact that gpt got so good is pure coincidence and not a result of the chat agent folks being some kind of visionairies.

Maybe some technological breakthrough comes along that makes the metaverse not suck. But if you're gonna build your company around such hopes and it works, then you're not smart, but just lucky. Or you need to build the breakthroughs yourself, but it doesn't look like that's what zuck is doing.

1. Wow you think transformers are a product like Search and Maps and Android are. That's great.

2. I think most people consider both Metaverse and chat agents as failures. ChatGPT isn't a 'chat agent' and most chat agents still don't work.

Watching the keynote and Google are expecting developers to cut and paste code into Bard rather than releasing a Bard plugin for code editors and taking on Microsoft directly. Weak.

Most people lack the vision beyond 15 minutes. Of course Metaverse is a failure for them, just like how Internet was just a glorified fax machine for luddites. So, popular opinion is the worst indicator of anything. Happy to make a public bet that Metaverse will consume 25% of a person's day for at least 4 billion people by 2035

If transformer doesn't excite you (mostly due to anti-Google bias), Google has a dozen products that has over a 500 Million users. It takes an unprecedented amount of anti-corp brainwash to say Google isn't successful or innovative.

> Google has a dozen products that has over a 500 Million users.

So did Microsoft in 2005. That doesn't mean the Ballmer era was innovative. If you need other examples of companies with hundreds of millions of users that aren't relevant, there's also Oracle.

Microsoft didn't have dozen products over 500 Million users in 2005. They only had Windows, Office and IE.

Ballmer set the foundations for many of Microsoft's success today, including Azure

Messenger? Skype? All were category defining products. What are Google’s twelve plus?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com