> The "Metaverse" is not necessarily anything more magical than HTTP serving 3d models rendered on the screens strapped to our faces (rather than 2d documents rendered on the screens strapped to our desk)

But that's just it, isn't it? GP said:

> > That feeling comes back to me as a kind of "Build a robot" moment in cases like this. "In our virtual reality metaverse people will be able to attend concerts with one another and save the tickets as NFTs!" Okay, but what you have is a screen that you can strap to your face and is nothing like a virtual reality metaverse and you have no idea how to get there.

Why would most people want "HTTP serving 3d models to a screen strapped on their face" to take the place of "attending concerts with one another"?

Without significant, ground-breaking advancements in freedom of movement/input and feedback/presence beyond the screen & headphones strapped to their face and maybe some shitty rumble from a playstation controller, this isn't "attending a concert with one another" in any meaningful sense, this is just "watch a concert from your couch while talking to your friend over discord", except with a more expensive screen fewer people own or seem inclined to buy, and clumsier input.

I feel like a lot of people who bring up “the concert use case” really need to think about it for more than two seconds.

Imagine jumping up and down headbanging to your favorite 2000’s pop-punk song, blasted off tequila and red bull, except you’re in your living room and wearing an expensive but loosely-fitting headset that obstructs your vision. This idea is gonna need a second draft.

I already use thick cardboard protectors over my pc screens when I play VR. The danger is there but it can be mitigated.

Eventually I guess people will have more movable furniture.

I'm saying that we don't need "significant, ground breaking advancements".

Obviously for something like a concert or dance club (where half the point is to literally feel the music and the crowd) we aren't there yet.

But for something like a stage play or a comedy show the significant barrier is a low-friction way to connect the audience response back to the performer(s). That comes down to implementation and infrastructure rather than the underlying technology.

The technology is at a point where the next increment could be the one that makes a mass adoption feasible for something like "360 Facetime", "Street view but it's live/real-time", or "Portal but it's the entire room", It's not going to take a "significant ground breaking [technological] advancement".

I think that's why Facebook wants to own it so hard they made it the parent brand and are trying to steal what the word "metaverse" even means so that people expect to always mean Facebook's ideal of a walled garden they control.