Talk:Metaverse

Reference to ChatGPT doesn't make sense

In the second paragraph of Implementations, there's a reference to ChatGPT. This doesn't make any sense. Stray edit from something? 136.159.213.1 (talk) 18:57, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 March 2023

I suggest adding these issues to the criticism and concerns on social issues:

As people increasingly pursue social interactions in the virtual world, concerns have been raised about ethics, sexual predators, terrorism entrapment and indoctrination, privacy, and security. While big tech companies pursuing the Metaverse concept are aware of these issues, they could deter people from enjoying and exploiting the total immersive experiences that the concept provides. Another challenge that may confront the Metaverse concept is the cost for hardware such as headsets and other products that will allow people to enter the virtual world. This could lead to social segregation, as the poor and people of limited economic means may be locked out. The Metaverse will also not suffice the interaction quest for people with different physical challenges, especially the blind and the deaf. The visually impaired will be greatly disadvantaged unless advanced technologies are available to address their plight.

Source: https://www.mdpi.com/2624-6511/5/3/40 Resilientcity (talk) 06:09, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

 Partly done: Already mentioned in this article are the concerns around sexual harassment, privacy and security, cost, and social isolation. You raise a good point about accessibility to those with physical disabilities, and that is absolutely necessary to include. I've added a sentence about it in #Social issues. There might be more in the article, but I'm wary of how closely they wrap Facebook in to the metaverse. Are you one of the authors? Your username suggests that you are in some way involved. SWinxy (talk) 14:27, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

Concerns about the section "Lack of adoption"

It is fundamentally difficult to speak of "lack of adoption", of something that does not yet exist extensively. Decentraland and Meta's platform are specifically mentioned here as negative examples, which do not even fulfill the criteria of the Metaverse, such as interoperability, economic exchange, AR and VR, etc. The Metaverse is still in its absolute initial stages of development, and for example, according to reports from City Group, McKinsey, PwC, will only be ready for the market in 5-15 years. It is a slow process in which many standards must first be created and everyone continues to work on it. Furthermore, it is nonsense to compare Metaverse with AI, since AI will be a core technology of Metaverse. Using opinion articles with clickbait character as a basis for statements here should be reconsidered. Dave-George (talk) 12:28, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

I have to agree with Dave-George. Specifically highlighting Decentraland's concurrent user of 8000 is a disservice to other metaverse implementations such as Second Life, Roblox, etc., which individually has daily active users orders of magnitude higher than Decentraland's. pepoluan (talk) 08:16, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 August 2023

Hi,

Please add sources to the sentence "Proposed applications for metaverse technology include improving work productivity,[31][45] [XX], ..."

We wrote a paper about the use of metaverse in the workplace and we would like to get it to a wider audience.

Thanks in advance, Tereza Tersi Science (talk) 12:19, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

•  Not done We don't add sources just to give the sources wider visibility (see WP:COI). If there's a valid reason for using that source we will consider adding it, but not simply to boost its visibility. --Masem (t) 12:56, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

References

Blockchain-Powered Crypto Metaverse

The "Blockchain-Powered Crypto Metaverse" seems to be placing undue focus on this one particular possible way to implementing a metaverse. It has citations, but seems to be weaving a narrative that is borderline POV-pushing re blockchain generally. Unsure why this is even here, as there doesn't appear to be any major public discussion on using blockchain to power the metaverse. I think it should be trimmed considerably. --ZimZalaBim ^talk 18:55, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

Since it's going into essay-like territory, it's probably better to remove tbh. SWinxy (talk) 19:15, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

Yeah. Looking more closely, the first citation is just promotional "partner content" and not really a valid reliable source. THe rest was just hype trying to support crypto generally. Maybe there could be a one-sentence mention of how blockchain might be part of a future implementation of the metaverse, but this is very WP:CRUFT. I cut it all. --ZimZalaBim ^talk 02:00, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

Ah, cool. partner content. i love when places do that. SWinxy (talk) 02:43, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

Does social security use metaverse

For application process 67.61.19.53 (talk) 07:28, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

The short answer is no. Do not try and apply for social security through a metaverse. In the United States, use this website: https://www.ssa.gov/

Please be careful of scams.

Information about social security in the US is at this article: Social Security Administration. Grayfell (talk) 07:50, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 Oct 2023

I suggest updating progresses regarding metaverse-enabled interactive learning environments into the "Implementations" section (which is currently mentioned shortly as a promising direction in the last paragraph). For example, Edverse launched Edverse Meta Classroom , which provides educators and learners with 3D visualizing and storytelling functions to facilitate K12 education. Another example is that The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology implemented the MetaHKUST platform in 2022, which integrates learning resources and opportunites that surpass geographical boundaries for university students and teachers in both Hong Kong campus and Guangzhou campus. CLclclclcl (talk) 06:32, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

The first source reads like churnalism derived from a press release. It also makes some dubious claims, and I don't think this source would improve this article. The second one is more plausibly useful, but your proposed wording is far, far too promotional. Could you please explain what should be added from this source without using business jargon or WP:BUZZWORDs? Thanks. Grayfell (talk) 08:00, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

References

Semi-protected edit request on 23 November 2023

Re: Criticism and concerns Feasibility [para 1] [para 2] "In an article for The New York Times on October 26, 2022, Ryan Mac, a technology reporter, claimed that for the past year, Mark Zuckerberg has struggled to find the best way to achieve the metaverse. He failed.[69]"

Given source article, suggest this is excessively negative interpretation, which mentions metaverse investment as only one factor in FB earnings call. Still - given reasonable editorial leeway - suggest minor edit (sentence 2) may be sufficient for a fix.

"In an article for The New York Times on October 26, 2022, Ryan Mac, a technology reporter, claimed that for the past year, Mark Zuckerberg has struggled to find the best way to achieve the metaverse. He has yet to succeed.[69] 203.118.175.40 (talk) 20:39, 23 November 2023 (UTC)"

 Done Thriftycat ^{Talk • Contribs} 03:41, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Removal of first three words

I’m wondering whether it would be a good idea to remove the three words starting this article (“In science fiction,”). Of course, the Metaverse can still be described as “hypothetical” in the first sentence, but the term has come into use outside purely science fiction contexts. I’m personally fine with either outcome, but I wanted to know what other editors thought. Gluonz (talk) 21:01, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

Good point. My interpretation is that the lead describes three different uses: The "in science fiction" part is describing the one specific usage, "In colloquial usage" is describing something else, and "In scientific research" finishes the set. None of these usages are the same, but they all overlap, and the latter two derive from science fiction. One way to clarify this would be to say something like The metaverse is a loosely-defined term which can have different meanings depending on context. In science fiction... That way it's clear that how its used in science fiction isn't the same as how its used in research or colloquially. That's a clunky proposal, but hopefully you get the idea. Grayfell (talk) 01:44, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

I would even go one level further and suggest that metaverse discourse has reached a point where we might even be able to unify the three definitions by taking their common elements. From what I can see, these are all the traits that matter across all three:

1. Digital/Virtual - All definitions

2. Social interaction - All definitions

3. Avatars - All definitions

4. Three dimensional - Science fiction, academia and in my opinion enough of colloquial sources to qualify

5. VR/AR - Science fiction, somewhat colloquial, emphasis missing in academic literature.

6. Economic connection - Mainly just colloquial usage, especially via crypto hypesters, but also as trading economies. Lightly emphasised in science fiction, some coverage in academia - not sure about this one.

I'll take a BOLD stab at it given the relatively low amount of attention on this article and we can discuss BrigadierG (talk) 14:01, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

I would avood that becauae thats original research, unless there is sourcing that shows how the three definitions are connected. Masem (t) 14:07, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

The sources don't make any attempt to distinguish these as three definitions - the idea that there is a "science fiction meaning", a "scientific meaning" and a "colloquial meaning" is, itself, a kind of OR. All sources about "the metaverse" believe themselves to be talking about the same thing in a platonic sense. I'd argue it's actually a more accurate summary of the available sources for this reason. BrigadierG (talk) 16:43, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

I've adjusted the lead, but it still needs more work. I don't think all sources about the metaverse believe they are referring to the same thing. Many of the sources note that the term is loose and often abused as a buzzword, and sources about the unsupported hype surrounding the term are abundant.

Breaking it down into three categories was more about organizing sources to make it easier to explain than it was about making any sort of factual claim about how the term is categorized. I agree that implying that the term has been categorized as such would be OR, but we still need to explain these sources, and this still seems like a straightforward way to do it.

Regardless, I really like having 'loose' in the first sentence. That helps make it very clear that the term is fuzzy.

Also, while the term usually refers to 3D software, many augmented reality projects are 2D, and there are (or were) fully 2D self-described metaverse projects. The term has also been retroactively applied to 2D projects such as The Palace, as well as text-based MUDs and similar. This, again, emphasizes how loose the term is. Grayfell (talk) 22:19, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 February 2024

Change X: "The metaverse is a loosely defined term referring to virtual worlds in which users represented by avatars interact,[1] usually in 3D and usually focused on social and economic connection."

Request change to Y: The metaverse (or "meta" for short) is a loosely defined term referring to virtual worlds in which users represented by avatars interact,[1] usually in 3D and usually focused on social and economic connection.

• • • • • (or "meta" for short)*****

The reason why: "meta" was used as a shorted term to mean "metaverse" way before Facebook Meta took hold of it. It should be made clear on this Wikipedia page that "meta" is the shortened version of "metaverse", like TV & television, etc.

Not everyone even uses Facebook, Instagram & WhatsApp - whereas the metaverse is for EVERYONE. 90.243.245.205 (talk) 14:39, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. QuietCicada chirp 14:58, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Retail spatial evolution: paving the way from traditional to metaverse retailing

https://www.academia.edu/22841392/Retail_spatial_evolution_paving_the_way_from_traditional_to_metaverse_retailing

Papagian-nidis et al. [3] have argued that the table needs to be further extended by including the prefix ‘meta’, short for metaverse. Metaverses (a phrase first used in Neal Stephen-son’s [4] novel Snow Crash, in order to describe how a virtual reality-based Internetmight evolve in the future) are virtual worlds extending our physical universe byadding new dimensions and domains for economic, social and leisure activities [3].They are often referred to as synthetic worlds, highlighting the fact that these worldsare products of human actions[5]

Electron Commer Res (2009) 9: 135–148

DOI 10.1007/s10660-009-9030-8

Published online: 10 March 2009© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

"‘meta’, short for metaverse"

There are endless examples of meta & metaverse together in tweets before Mark Zuckerberg's name change to Meta:

Tweets from Oct 26, 2021 (still days before Meta Facebook was launched):

“Help immortalize the SPACE³ Gallery located at -43,20 in the metaverse. The installation is a unique design & is intended to be a permanent installation for the meta.”

Humans of the Metaverse > “The Meta City is growing”

“Metaverse-me” > “Let alone “meta-worlds” (implying ‘metaverse worlds’)

1. Meta > let’s see your #metaverse domain lists!

“Meta Monsters x Nemesis themed metaverse land”

Etc.

Use the search term/code: "meta metaverse until:2021-10-27" in X/Twitter. [external links removed]

"meta metaverse until:2020-10-27"

"meta metaverse until:2018-10-27"

Etc.

There are literally endless tweets linking meta to be the shortened form of metaverse, long before Facebook/Zuckerberg.

Many #metaverse in conjunction with #meta dating way back

--

How to become a meta-star in 2015 in ten easy steps

December 30, 2014

https://www.hypergridbusiness.com/2014/12/how-to-become-a-meta-star-in-2015-in-ten-easy-steps/?utm_source=Metaverse&utm_medium=Twitter

"A star of the metaverse. A meta-star."

And corresponding tweet from Metaverse @Metaverse 4:59 AM · Dec 31, 2014

HB: How to become a meta-star in 2015 in ten easy steps [link removed as not allowed] #Metaverse #Business

--

There will also be endless more examples on the web but this seems conclusive enough. 90.243.245.205 (talk) 17:59, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: A single paper from 15 years ago in a lesser-known journal is not enough to make this change. Tweets are not reliable sources, and the reliability of hypergridbusiness.com has never been discussed. Jamedeus (talk) 21:22, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

User-generated content (via many different individual human beings & many companies - with endless examples thereof…) from before Facebook / Zuckerberg’s name addition or change, should at least be taken into consideration for solid evidence of already existing pre-use of the term.

That’s all we’re describing here, pre-use of the “meta” meaning for “metaverse” from before Facebook Meta Platforms.

In a current search (not using before): "meta", "short for metaverse" >

many are saying/believe in these articles that "meta" is simply “short for metaverse".

For example,

—

Facebook Is Now Meta: Twitterverse Made Fun Of Facebook’s New Name

https://www.indiatimes.com/technology/news/facebook-meta-twitter-reactions-552854.html

“Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg announced that it was rebranding the company to ‘Meta’ -- short for metaverse,”

Instantly everyone ALREADY KNEW (the day after) that “meta” was short for metaverse. NO LEARNING NECESSARY. It was already an established natural shortening progression in the [early on / in the process of creation] metaverse community.

—

https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/the-meta-narrative-what-weve-learned-from-the-facebook-papers

“Meta is short for “metaverse,” a coinage from a dystopian sci-fi novel in which people retreat into virtual life to avoid their grim physical reality.”

—

However this shortening dates back to at least 15 years ago, as pointed out (surely by reputable human beings to humanity, taking the time to publish a scientific paper - i.e. not to be ignored), where at that time the concept of the metaverse was very early on, but clearly “meta” was/is a very obvious natural-evolutionary shortening progression of the word, and so is not-solely related to the business corporation “META Platforms”.

Meta Platforms Inc. cannot use “meta” in its generic form as solely meaning “metaverse”.

Meta Platforms is a corporation that is regularly in the news for abhorrent crimes to humanity, such as this reliable source:

https://www.wsj.com/tech/meta-staff-found-instagram-subscription-tool-enabled-child-exploitation-the-company-pressed-ahead-anyway-a18e81e6

"Meta Staff Found Instagram Tool Enabled Child Exploitation. The Company Pressed Ahead Anyway.

The term “Meta” (I.e. metaverse) should not be completely tarnished by one irresponsible self-serving profiteering corporation!!!

—

There are also many/endless examples of “meta+word” with the exact corresponding meaning “metaverse+word”, as the natural progressed shortened form (that pre-date & post-date Facebook, Mark Zuckerberg ("They "trust me". Dumb f****.") > META Platforms), that is of beneficial use to ALL OF HUMANITY. ANYONE can use this naturally progressed shortening because it is ridiculous that they would not be able to, and have to instead use “metaverse+word” every time, because of a business, self-served profiteering corporation’s ownership claim of it!

This is why this should be made VERY clear to everyone on this Wikipedia page.

Brief examples include:

Metaverse Navigator (イセカイナビ, Isekainabi)^?, Meta-Nav for short,

Meta Zone (Metaverse Zone, or even just “Metas” as the shortened form of Metaverse Zones)

Pre-dating Meta Platforms Inc.

There’s also use of “word+meta” to mean exactly “word+metaverse”, e.g. Basketball Meta (either a basketball metaverse, or simply a zone within the metaverse). This should be available for everyone around the globe for potential naturally progressed evolved usage, not solely Meta Platforms.

There are literally endless examples on social media, where the public communicates with each other! That is what we’re describing here, public use of the term, not attuning to corporate business interests. 90.243.199.154 (talk) 13:47, 28 February 2024 (UTC)