Jump to content



Recommended Posts

Samo promena naziva kompanije, kao što je Gugl pre par godina promenio u Alfabet. Mislim, ima logike, kompanija je sad više od samog Fejsbuka, i to donosi zabunu. Menjaju i skraćenicu na berzi iz FB u MVRS što za sad nema nekog smisla jer je taj Metaverzum baš long shot. Drugim rečima, rebrandiraju se jer ih prate skandali. Nova Apple politika privatnosti u iOS-u im je napravila solidan problem i otkinula dobar deo kolača, pa su podbacili i u najnovijim finansijskim izveštajima. 

A ja evo upravo muku mučim (na poslu) zbog nekih Zuckovih antidiskriminatornih pravila koja su previše stroga i bukvalna. :frust:

Link to comment

mislim da je ulog mnogo veci jer u svetu koji postaje masovno digitalan, digitalne interakcije i trgovine ce se odvijati u ovako necemu. verovatno ce vecina ljudi raditi na ovaj nacin u sledecih 10-20 godina, mozda i pre.


tako da osim sto na ovaj nacin pokusava da se opere od lose reputacije, zak gleda da osvoji i novu teritoriju.







Edited by extragluv
Link to comment

Ma naravno, samo što će mnogi imati svoju verziju budućnosti, i da li će baš njihova i pored povoljne startne pozicije biti ta, veliko je pitanje.

Ali na njima je da probaju, to je sasvim logično.

Samo mi je brendiranje cele kompanije prema nečemu što je još uvek u idejnoj fazi, ne znam, možda ipak malo bezveze.

Ali ok, pritiskaju sa svih strana, nije ni reptilima lako… :D

Edited by mraki
Link to comment

Kad smo kod toga, zar nisu ambiciozno najavljivali i neki projekat Libra, njihovu kriptovalitu i sistem plaćanja? Šta bi sa tim?

Kažem, želje i ambicije su jedno, realnost drugo.

Ne bi bilo prvi put da fejluju u nečem velikom i pored svih resursa i iskustava koje imaju. Pa i Gugl je recimo čuven po tome.

Link to comment
On 29.10.2021. at 17:03, mraki said:

Kad smo kod toga, zar nisu ambiciozno najavljivali i neki projekat Libra, njihovu kriptovalitu i sistem plaćanja? Šta bi sa tim?

Kažem, želje i ambicije su jedno, realnost drugo.

Ne bi bilo prvi put da fejluju u nečem velikom i pored svih resursa i iskustava koje imaju. Pa i Gugl je recimo čuven po tome.

puklo epski. kontam da ce pokusati iznova sa lansiranjem novog/starog blokcejna, samo sto se ovog puta nece fokusirati na novac vec na NFT 



  • +1 1
Link to comment



If that future sounds a lot like the present, it’s because the world these CEOs propose is in many ways a souped-up version of the existing internet. The metaverse is a stitching together of disparate technological phenomena of today—videogames, virtual reality, Zoom calls, cryptocurrency, social media—into a new whole upon which countless brands, creators and software engineers can do their thing.

According to Mr. Zuckerberg, the metaverse is the next generation of the internet. This would make it a “platform” like others before it, including open ones like the web, proprietary but broadly accessible ones like “the cloud,” and closed ones like Facebook’s ecosystem and Apple’s app store.




This leads to a yet another way of looking at the metaverse: It may turn out to be a world made mostly of hype, an attempt to gin up interest from investors and the media, and a retread of past attempts to suck everyone out of the real world and into virtual ones. If this is the case, it would mean the metaverse as defined by Facebook and game companies can’t win against stiff competition from that other three-dimensional hub of recreation and socialization known as “real life.”




This leads to a final way of looking at the metaverse: a shared world that might be able to transcend the efforts of the world’s largest corporations to control it, at least for a time. Its openness would be attractive to users and entrepreneurs precisely because it allows them to route around the gatekeepers that would dictate to them what they can put in the metaverse, while taking a cut of the revenue they generate from it.

Perhaps, as in tech battles past, future metaverses offered by a variety of companies will coexist for some time before one or another wins out. (Remember AOL’s dominance before the web took it out?)

Even Mr. Zuckerberg on Thursday nodded to the virtues of a metaverse that is built with open standards, interoperability, and with new (presumably democratic) forms of governance. “The metaverse will not be created by one company,” he wrote in a post on Facebook.

On the other hand, today’s tech giants haven’t gained their status as history’s most valuable companies based on their talent for restraint and comity. Many people today worry Facebook and other tech titans already have too much influence over our world. In the metaverse future, the virtual world we live in could be theirs.

Link to comment

The Metaverse Was Lame Even Before Facebook - The Atlantic


Facebook can claim originality in at least one thing. Its combination of scale and irresponsibility has unleashed a set of diverse and fascinating sociopolitical challenges that it will take lawmakers, scholars, and activists at least a generation to fix. If Facebook has learned anything from 17 years of avoiding mediating those conflicts, it’s not apparent from the vision for the metaverse, where the power of human connection is celebrated as uncritically as it was before Macedonian fake-news brokers worked to sway the 2016 election.



How will a company that can block only 6 percent of Arabic-language hate content deal with dangerous speech when it’s worn on an avatar’s T-shirt or revealed at the end of a virtual fireworks display? Add monetization to the problems of content moderation—who gets to make money off a digital hate-speech T-shirt?—and Facebook’s oversight board is going to be very, very busy.

Neal Stephenson’s metaverse has been a lasting creation because it’s fictional. It doesn’t have to solve all the intricate problems of content moderation and extremism and interpersonal interaction to raise questions about what virtual worlds can give us and what our real world lacks. Today’s metaverse creators are missing the point, just like I missed the point back at Ted’s Fish Fry in 1994. The metaverse isn’t about building perfect virtual escape hatches—it’s about holding a mirror to our own broken, shared world. Facebook’s promised metaverse is about distracting us from the world it’s helped break.


Ethan Zuckerman is a professor and directs the Initiative for Digital Infrastructure at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst.


Link to comment
  • 1 month later...

Dozens of Rohingya refugees in the UK and US have sued Facebook, accusing the social media giant of allowing hate speech against them to spread.

They are demanding more than $150bn (£113bn) in compensation, claiming Facebook's platforms promoted violence against the persecuted minority.

An estimated 10,000 Rohingya Muslims were killed during a military crackdown in Buddhist-majority Myanmar in 2017.

Facebook, now called Meta, did not immediately respond to the allegations.

The company is accused of allowing "the dissemination of hateful and dangerous misinformation to continue for years".

In the UK, a British law firm representing some of the refugees has written a letter to Facebook, seen by the BBC, alleging:

  • Facebook's algorithms "amplified hate speech against the Rohingya people"
  • The firm "failed to invest" in moderators and fact checkers who knew about the political situation in Myanmar
  • The company failed to take down posts or delete accounts that incited violence against Rohingya
  • It failed to "take appropriate and timely action", despite warnings from charities and the media





Ako već mogu da zarađuju na promovisanju hate speecha, nadam se da će morati i da plate deo odštete koji je taj hate speech doneo

Link to comment
  • 1 month later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Create New...