The Metaverse is a Solution Looking for a Problem

by aestetix

In late 2021, (((Mark Zuckerberg))) officially changed the name of his company from "Facebook" to "Meta," in a stated attempt to usher in the "metaverse."

Answering the confusion and ridicule he received, Zuckerberg assured the world that not only would the metaverse soon be a reality, but that we would all be using it.

In this article, we're going to explore potential reasons why he made this move, and why it symbolizes everything that is wrong with the current wave of "tech-bros."

Before addressing the metaverse, we should look at Zuckerberg's potential motives for making this change.

The first and most obvious is that Facebook is damaged goods.  Between its questionable origin story in FaceMash, countless abuses of its user base, and completely broken concept of "privacy," one could easily argue that changing the name and focus could help reset the brand and distance itself from the numerous legal battles in which its "previous" incarnation was embroiled.

Next, Zuckerberg appears to be a control freak.

Notice how rarely he grants interviews with challenging questions and how, when he gets a surprise question, he stumbles over his answer.  This demand for control extends to potential business threats, such as Instagram and WhatsApp, which he promptly acquires and either employs in the Facebook arsenal or quietly sunsets.  His entire business rests on technology he cannot control: the vast majority of people access Facebook via an iPhone or Android phone, and the failed attempt at a Facebook phone was lackluster.  By changing focus to the metaverse, he can usher in a new platform that is no longer dependent on the competition.

Finally, it's reasonable to ask how competent he actually is at business management.

A close analysis of Facebook's past (as well as Congressional testimonies) could lead one to question whether (((Sheryl Sandberg))), his former COO, was actually in charge.  Could it be that Sandberg was the real brains behind the curtain and, once she left, the result was the half-baked array of Nintendo Wii lookalike avatars and expensive cumbersome headsets that seems to be a product looking for a market?

Setting Facebook aside, the first issue with the metaverse is that the word "metaverse" means absolutely nothing.  If we ask ten people what it means, we'll get eleven answers.  Some say it is virtual reality, some say it is augmented reality, and still others say it already exists in what we call the Internet.  Since the Internet is common knowledge, let's focus on the other options to see if we can come to a better understanding.

Although Virtual Reality (VR) has been around for a long time, it has yet to find a purpose beyond being a cool party trick.  While it has a genesis in science fiction stories and movies like Tron and The Lawnmower Man, in truth it is a long list of promises assuring that once this and that technical bug gets resolved, the technology will quickly find use cases.

But this is the exact opposite of how innovation works: necessity breeds invention, not the other way around.  If we look at revolutionary technology, there is always some major improvement it brings.

For example, the computer spreadsheet allowed people to make in seconds the same calculations that used to take hours.  And sometimes technology will solve part of a problem, but not quite as well as what it is aiming to replace.  One could argue that more recent innovations like video chat allow people to communicate across the world, but, as seen during the China COVID-19 pandemic, it turns out that Zoom calls are a poor substitution for in-person discussions.

So what does VR replace or improve upon?

The most common benefit we hear is that it gives an online sense of "presence," recreating things like eye contact, facial expressions, and so on.  But given the fact that in-person presence is clearly superior, this quickly descends into being either a competitor to video chat, or an also-ran with a more expensive barrier to entry.  As far as music concerts, online school, and other potential avenues, one of the most common gripes of the last few years is that people wanted to be in-person again, like in the "before times."

At present, there are parallels with another demographic: gamers.

Both VR enthusiasts and gamers clamor for faster hardware, better graphics, and more responsive controls, so it would logically follow that they would be the target audience for VR systems.  And to an extent, this has been true - but the reach is limited.  Most new games released for VR also offer a traditional version of the game, and when given the opportunity to upgrade hardware, it's not clear if a gamer would buy a new graphics card or a VR headset.  Unless, of course, they are a diehard fan of Beat Saber.

One of the big issues that VR tech hasn't addressed: whereas in "real" life people employ the use of all of their senses, VR focuses on sight.  It can capture hand gestures to a degree, but a large part of using our hands involves not only tactile feedback, but also resistance.  Could there ever be a "weightlifting" VR program that was more effective than going to the gym?  And what about our sense of smell?  Is a VR stroll through a botanical garden any match for the real thing?  And lest we forget, by its very nature, VR excludes the blind, while existing technology like the web has methods like the ALT tag to try to be accommodating.

When we focus on the VR aspect of the metaverse, we forget that the prefix "meta" means liminal, or beyond, or a reflection of reality, so maybe a more honest approach would be using Augmented Reality (AR).

AR typically involves laying a digital interface over the "real" world, enhancing how we can interact with our environment.  The two most well known examples are probably the ill-fated Google Glass, and Pokémon Go.

AR does have the potential to be extremely powerful in some cases: imagine we encounter an injured person on the street, and use our AR system to scan the injury, notify local hospitals, and get tips on how to prepare for the ambulance to arrive.  But don't we already have this in the form of "smart" phones?  And considering the depression and suicide rates of teenagers who are glued to their phones, perhaps making those devices even more accessible is not such a great idea.

Technology should enhance reality, not replace it.

Some tools, like spreadsheets, address real problems and give us welcome solutions, but the metaverse feels like a solution looking for a problem that doesn't exist.  The people touting "metaverse" technology are reminiscent of greasy used car salesmen, but they don't even have used cars to sell.

In the end, the metaverse is a used car lot with no cars.