Not least because you even need more powerful compute to run any of it. Most consumer laptops would choke on most of the "producer" side skills I listed. And knowing how to run it on GPUs on the cloud is far harder than ftping a .html file to geocities
Conversation
Interesting btw, that all these new technologies need GPUs/tensor computing at a fairly powerful scale as a pre-condition of participation on the producer side... it's no longer cheap either
3
2
44
People pointing me to various learning resources— To be clear I don’t think it’s just me not having figured it out. I don’t think anyone has. It’s like the web circa 1994. Nobody had yet put the pieces together in a workable tech+box configuration.
6
1
35
It’s mainly crypto people protesting 😂
AI and metaverse people seem more comfortable with not having it all figured out yet. All 3 are at the late experimental stage. Cusp of arrival but IMO not there yet.
3
36
I have non-trivial stakes in 2 of the 3 (web3 and AI) and trying to develop one in the third (metaverse). The one I was personally most interested in a few years ago (IoT —> AVs —> robotics) is the runt of this litter. I first flagged the set in 2017
1
1
10
Reason I mention stakes, which I rarely do, is that true believers are exhausting. They think anything short of 100% enthusiastic belief is techlash-grade commie hostility. If upside scenarios don’t pan out I’ll lose more than most. That’s cause to be more rigorous, not less.
2
1
23
This is partly why I tend to actively work on the quietest active fronts, and stay largely passively invested on the more frenzied ones. Right now the quietest active front is robotics. There’s a ton of interesting things happening but fortunately no crazed true believer crowd.
2
27
In a way robotics doesn’t belong in this cohort. It’s the equivalent of mobile for web1/2. Once web3, metaverse, and AI get to a point of development, the iPhone of robots will become possible. In the meantime, enjoy Boston dynamics dancing robots and early IoT/internet-of-shit.
1
2
24
The cost and performance on batteries, motors, sensors (esp vision), hydraulics is almost there. What’s missing is robot-social-media (web3), better brains (low-cost ML hardware), and environment (metaverse… robots will live in suitable VR+AR simultaneously)
1
13
Btw I think “metaverse” is here to stay, much as kids might ridicule it as boomerverse. The terminology of AR/VR/XR/MR was floundering because the device level is the wrong level for visioning. Metaverse is “smartphone” grade cringe, not “info superhighway” grade cringe.
3
23
I suspect it will come together in the way streaming did, not as a frontier but in a way where incumbents ally with high-value back-catalog owners to create properties. Linden labs approach relied too much on created content. Extending movie and gaming universes will be easier.
Replying to
I think the equivalent of website will be “ride”
As in the initial metaverse will look like an Internet of digitized theme parks. twitter.com/hondanhon/stat
This Tweet is unavailable.
4
1
18
I think metaverse narrowly viewed as a Facebook idea is vaporware, likely with some cynical calculations attached, but industry wide (include Microsoft, Nvidia, Disney, gaming studios) there’s a there there. I’d point to Pokémon Go as the genesis event.
3
16
The biggest difference between this tech wave and the last few is the radically darker societal context. On a scale of -10 to 10 of broader pessimism to optimism:
PC: 4
Web: 8
Mobile+cloud: 6
Web3+AI+Metaverse: -4
Covid+climate+culture war+inequality = nasty global environment
2
5
35
It’s the “into darkness” tech wave. A dark age tech wave. Part grimdark part hopepunk.
Pity “dark tech” already has a different conflicting meaning.
Need a good name that’s not “4th industrial revolution” or “second digital revolution”
Gaiatech? Cavetech? Doomtech? Hopetech?
9
1
15
