The confusion and disconnect comes from the fact that the Metaverse, by definition, cannot ever exist. Zuckerberg is chasing a fantasy.

I wrote in more detail about it here [1], but the basic gist is:

1. A real "Metaverse" that isn't just another video game would require every tech company to agree on a single standard for a MMO world, and

2. There are zero financial reasons why any other company would agree to a) wait for a standard to be agreed upon and b) cede the majority of their profits to the owner of this singular Metaverse.

Therefore, a real Metaverse can never happen. Which makes it even sillier that Mark Zuckerberg continues to go all-in on this vision.

[1] https://jeremyreimer.com/rockets-item.lsp?p=287

Doesn't that same logic apply to the web and html? Are you saying that an open standard like the web couldn't arise in the current political/economic climate?

I think it would be very unlikely for the web and html to arise in the current political climate, yes. It only came to be in the first place because of a massive amount of government investment that was an artifact of the space race in the late 1960s and early 70s. For a time, all the major tech companies were trying to build their own walled garden alternatives to the Internet (Microsoft with MSN, Apple with eWorld, AOL, Prodigy, Compuserve, etc.) and they only failed because the Internet grew faster than any one of them could.

> How are those "metaverse"?

Good question. My guess is because those things are all 3D virtual worlds (to some extent) and/or a platform that is focused on social connection. Obviously they all need some connective tissue and evolution before they are a legit meta verse.

Well, that goes to the question of "what is does 'metaverse' mean anyway?"

I haven't seen a description of what 'metaverse' means that doesn't just describe Minecraft (which I love).

these folks, fwiw, claim there's a $5T opportunity by 2030: https://www.mckinsey.com/capabilities/growth-marketing-and-s...

tldr: all the $$ still comes from commoditizing community building by subjecting them to ads and counting conversion.

Conversion is always a tricky beast to count, even in our intense tracking of individuals and attempt/successes at tracking users across time, applications, sessions and devices and I'm just honestly not sure how much more humans can handle being advertised to or even spend as things get tighter and tighter. At some point cool new [insert object here] doesn't matter when you are calculating the gas needed to warm your home and thinking about using your hot bathwater to do so.

> mckinsey

Yeah, right. They're consultants - this is what they do. Better hire them so you can figure out how to get your slice of $5T!

They are digital spaces that people now live a significant portion of their life in. (its what they do when they aren't working, or even when they are supposed to be working, most of their social interactions come from it, its a significant part of their identity)